Davis v. Town of Cary North Carolina et al

Filing 82

ORDER denying 64 Motion to Reassign Case ; denying 65 Motion Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 59(c) - New Evidence; denying 66 Motion Relief from Judgment ; denying 68 Motion for Additional Findings. Signed by US District Judge Terrence W. Boyle on 6/30/2017. Certified copy sent via US Mail to William Scott Davis, Jr. at Butner - F.M.C., P.O. Box 1600, Butner, NC 27509. (Stouch, L.)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION 5:08-CV-176-BO WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR., Plaintiff, v. TOWN OF CARY, NC, eta!., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER This matter is before the Court on motions by William Scott Davis Jr., pro se, to reopen this closed case and for various kinds of relief. This case, along with several other cases filed by Mr. Davis in this Court, has been dismissed, judgment has been entered, and has been appealed several times and mandates have issued. Mr. Davis' current filings, which are at best difficult to decipher, do not appear to provide the Court with any basis upon which to reopen these matters or provide Mr. Davis with relief from judgment. Moreover, a pre-filing injunction has been entered against Mr. Davis, see Davis v. Mitchell, 5:12-CV-493-F (E.D.N.C. March 3, 2014), and it would appear that Mr. Davis is attempting to use these motions to reassign, under Rule 59, for relief from judgment, or for to enter additional filings, as a method by which to avoid the prefiling injunction. 1 The Court will not sanction such action. Accordingly, the motion to reassign case, [DE 64], motion under Rule 59(c), [DE 65], motion for relief from judgment, [DE 66], and motion for additional findings, [DE 68], are each 1 A pre-filing injunction has also been issued against Mr. Davis in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, Davis v. Town of Cary North Carolina, No. 16-1377, 2017 WL 1403166 (4th Cir. Apr. 19, 2017), and the Eastern District of Virginia, Davis v. Jawaorski, No. 4:13-CV-63 (E.D. Va. Nov. 14, 2013). DENIED. The Court will consider critically any future filings by Mr. Davis in which it is apparent that he is merely seeking to avoid the pre-filing injunction. SO ORDERED, this)!_ day :r tAAA/ of~ 2017. TERRENCE W. BOY.LE UNITED STATES DISTRICT 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?