Legg v. Conklin

Filing 74

ORDER denying 73 Motion for Miscellaneous Relief. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 1/6/2009. (KAH)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DETRIA LEGG, Plaintiff, v. 04-CV-6549T MARY LOU CONKLIN, Defendant. ORDER DETRIA LEGG, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL A. BATTLE, ESQ., et al., Defendants. 06-CV-6583T On September 22, 2004, plaintiff Detria Legg filed suit in Steuben County Supreme Court against defendant Mary Lou Conklin. Approximately one week later, the action was removed to federal court. (06-CV-6549 Docket # 1). Thereafter, on November 20, 2006, plaintiff filed a second federal action against defendants Michael A. Battle and Christopher V. Taffe. (06-CV-6583 Docket # 1). Both matters were referred to the undersigned for the supervision of pretrial discovery and the hearing and disposition of all non-dispositive motions, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(A) and (B). (04-CV-6549 Docket # 3; 06-CV-6583 Docket # 6). On November 25, 2008, plaintiff filed identical motions in each of the pending actions. (04-CV-6549 Docket # 73; 06-CV-6583 Docket # 60). Specifically, plaintiff seeks: (1) the "removal" of various families whose alleged narcotics-trafficking related crimes are purportedly responsible for ninety percent of the 2008 Medicaid deficit; (2) that the 2009 Olympic games be held in either Syracuse or Buffalo, New York; (3) that the "plunging Wall Street Stock Exchange be given 100% to the Reverend Floyd H. Flake;" and (4) the reserve of 50 to 100 acres of western Canadian farm land. Because this Court does not have the authority to grant plaintiff the relief she seeks, her motions are denied. CONCLUSION It is the decision and order of this Court that plaintiff's motions (04-CV-6549 Docket # 73; 06-CV-6583 Docket # 60) are DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Marian W. Payson MARIAN W. PAYSON United States Magistrate Judge Dated: Rochester, New York January 6 , 2009 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?