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-

Download PDF
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

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?