Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Golden v. Department of Corrections

United States District Court, D. Nebraska

April 28, 2016

KELLY MARINUS GOLDEN, Plaintiff,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Richard G. Kopf Senior United States District Judge

On February 3, 2016, the court conducted an initial review of Plaintiff’s Complaint. (Filing No. 17.) After discussing Plaintiff’s allegations-which briefly reference several unrelated events occurring between August 2011 and May 2015 against 17 defendants-the court determined that the Complaint did not comply with the general rules of pleading or the federal rules governing the proper joinder of defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 20. (Filing No. 17.) The court gave Plaintiff 30 days in which to file an amended complaint that “(a) explain[ed] what each defendant did to him, when the defendant did it, and how the defendant’s actions harmed him; and (b) set forth only related claims that stem from the same basic events or occurrences.” (Filing No. 17 at CM/ECF pp. 4-5.)

In response, Plaintiff filed an untitled, one-paragraph letter addressed “To Whom It May Concern.”[1] (Filing No. 19.) The letter stated:

You want the lawsuit amended fine

I want $6 million from the D.O.C. for being released from prison after getting too much good time and being out 6 months getting back into my life, my children’s lives and now my grandchildren’s lives. Then being arrested twice on a warrent [sic] issued by the State of Nebraska. Then have to go back to prison for over a year. Because they messed up. There’s your amendment.

(Filing No. 19.)

Because Plaintiff’s only claim sought money damages against a state agency, I concluded that Plaintiff’s suit must be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the Eleventh Amendment. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (court shall dismiss case if court determines that action “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief”). (Filing No. 22 (Memorandum and Order dismissing case on Apr. 6, 2016); Filing No. 23 (Judgment dated Apr. 6, 2016).)

Plaintiff has filed a motion wishing to “appeal your d[ec]ision”; to “write out everything and send it in the next day” because he “didn’t know [he] had to rewrite what they all did” due to “no legal help”; and asking “if the [Department of Corrections] is unsueable why wasn’t I told this at the beginning instead of leading me on?” (Filing No. 24.) It is unclear whether Plaintiff wants me to reconsider the dismissal, or whether he wishes to appeal my decision to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The court will consider Plaintiff’s motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6). This rule provides that a court may relieve a party from a final judgment and reopen the case for the following reasons:

(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;
(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b);
(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;
(4) the judgment is void;
(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.