Hines v. Veterans Outreach Center

Filing 106

ORDER denying 99 Motion for Reconsideration ; granting 100 Motion, Clerk of Court is directed to edit the docket as explained in this Order ; finding as moot 104 Motion ; finding as moot 104 Motion to Amend or Correct. Signed by Hon. Jonathan W. Feldman on 03/02/2017. A copy of this Order has been sent to pro se plaintiff. (JKT)-CLERK TO FOLLOW UP-

MAR 0 2 2017

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
JERRY HINES, JR.,

DECISION & ORDER

Plaintiff,

v.

10-CV-6493

VETERANS OUTREACH CENTER,

INC.,

Defendant.

Factual Background
In

July

respect
against
with

to

2014

plaintiff

defendant

Verdict

had

not

in

favor

presided

Jerry

Act

of

Hines,

over

Jr.'s

a

jury

trial

retaliation

with

claims

Outreach Center under the Americans

of

engaged

(Docket # 81) .

judgment

Court

Veterans

Disabilities

defendant

this

1990.
in

The

jury

unlawful

found

that

retaliation.

see

The Clerk of Court entered a
the

defendant

on

July

24,

the
Jury

notice of

2014.

See

Judgment (Docket # 83).
Thereafter,

plaintiff

filed

Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
also filed post-trial motions
or ·for
without

a

new

cost.

trial,
See

Docket

motions on March 19,
thereafter,

and

plaintiff

##

filed

Notice

of

Appeal

See Docket #

82.

to

the

Plaintiff

seeking to set aside the verdict

for

2015.

a

a

copy

85, · 91.
See Order
a

"Motion

of

the
The

trial
Court

(Docket #
for

transcript
denied

93) .

Ruling

on

both

Shortly
Perjury

See Docket

Issues."

Decision
Plaintiff

and

Order

then

#

94.

The

dated March

filed

Court denied this motion by

28,

2016.

three more motions.

See

Docket

98.

on April

First,

#

19,

2016 plaintiff filed a Motion for Reconsideration and for Relief
from

Judgment.

plaintiff

See

filed

a

#

Docket
Motion

Finally,

on June

20,

Ruling.

99.

for

See Docket # 104.

Next,

on

Correction.

April

See

2016 plaintiff filed a

25,

Docket

2016,
#

100.

Motion to Make a

This Decision and Order will resolve

all of these pending motions.

Discussion
1.

Docket # 99:

Plaintiff again

This motion is denied.

seeks to re"litigate issues that were either decided by the jury
or

resolved

motions.

by

There

this
is

Court

in

no basis

previous

for

the

trial

Court

to

or

post-trial

reconsider

its

prior rulings or the verdict of the jury.
2.

Docket # 100:

Plaintiff seeks an Order of this Court

directing the Clerk to "correct" docket entry # 92.

This docket

entry describes a motion filed by plaintiff as a motion "to make
a ruling on the ethnicity of former counsel."

(emphasis added) .

Plaintiff has represented that his description of the motion was
incorrect and what he was referring to was the ethics of defense
counsel,
him at

specifically the fact
trial now works

for

that the lawyer who represented

the
2

law firm that represented the

defendant

at

trial.

This

Court already addressed plaintiff's

argument regarding the ethics of his former counsel and found no
impropriety.

See

recognizing
addressed
party

(Docket

that

the

substance

an

ethical

issue,

to

should

plaintiff's

Order

the

docket

argument,

of
and

entry

the

#

Court

amend the docket entry at issue.
docket entry # 92 to now state:

be

93)

at

n.

plaintiff's
seeing

no

amended

grants

However,

2.

motion

harm
to

plaintiff's

to

was

either

conform
motion

to
to

The Clerk of Court shall edit
"Motion to make a ruling on the

ethics of a former counsel."
3.

## 99,

Docket # 104:
100 as

Based on the Court's rulings on Docket

set forth above,

the Court determines that this

motion is now moot.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing,

plaintiff's motions are denied in

part and granted in part.
SO ORDERED.

W. FELDMAN
ed States Magistrate Judge

Dated:

March 2, 2017
Rochester, New York

3