Lane v. Clark County

Filing 56

ORDER. Plaintiff's pro se motions, Docket Nos. 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , shall be STRICKEN from thedocket. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 6/28/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
10
11
RANDEL LANE,
12
Plaintiff,
13
vs.
14
CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA,
15
Defendant.
16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:11-cv-00485-JCM-NJK
ORDER
(Docket Nos. 51-55)

On June 20, 2016, while represented by counsel, Plaintiff Randel Lane filed six pro se motions:

17

18 a motion to talk to Judge Mahan, Docket No 50; a motion to turn in new evidence, Docket No. 51; a
19 motion for discovery, Docket No. 52; a motion to vacate the Ninth Circuit ruling, Docket No. 53; a motion
20 for Clark County to turn over discovery, Docket No. 54; and a motion to turn in discovery, Docket No.
21 55.
22

A party who is represented by counsel “cannot while so represented appear or act in the case. This

23 means that once an attorney makes an appearance on behalf of a party, that party may not personally file
24 a document with the court; all filings must thereafter be made by the attorney.” LR IA 11-6(a). The
25 docket is clear that Plaintiff is represented by counsel in the instant case. See Docket.1
26
27

1

Additionally, numerous timeliness and procedural defects exist in Plaintiff’s motions. As Plaintiff
28 improperly filed the motions pro se while represented by counsel, however, the Court need not reach these

1

Accordingly,

2

Plaintiff’s pro se motions, Docket Nos. 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, shall be STRICKEN from the

3 docket.
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

DATED: June 28, 2016.

6
7
8

______________________________________
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 issues and does not engage in a discussion of them.
2