Sconiers v. Smith et al, No. 1:2010cv01130 - Document 11 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING in FULL the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending Denial of Plaintiff's Motion for a New Trial, Amendment of Judgment, Or Reconsideration 9 & 10 , signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 2/14/11. (Hellings, J)

Download PDF
Sconiers v. Smith et al Doc. 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 JANETTA SCONIERS, 10 11 12 CASE NO. 1:10-cv-01130-AWI-SMS Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL, AMENDMENT OF JUDGMENT, OR RECONSIDERATION v. M. BRUCE SMITH, et al., 13 Defendants. (Docs. 9 &10) / 14 15 On August 23, 2010, the Court dismissed with prejudice Plaintiff’s third complaint 16 seeking to involve the federal courts in California’s administration of her mother’s estate. The 17 Court determined that it lacked jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims. Thereafter, Plaintiff timely 18 moved for amendment of judgment or a new trial pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 59(a) or 59(e), and for 19 reconsideration pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 60(b)-(d). 20 Concluding that the motion lacked merit, the Magistrate Judge recommended that 21 Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration or amendment of judgment be denied. The Findings and 22 Recommendations were served on the Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections to the 23 Findings and Recommendations were to be filed on or before February 10, 2011. Plaintiff has 24 not filed objections. 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court has reviewed 26 Plaintiff’s motion de novo. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds Plaintiff’s 27 objections to lack merit and the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record 28 and proper legal analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Findings and Recommendations, filed 2 January 27, 2011, are adopted in full. Plaintiff’s motion for amendment of judgment, new trial, 3 more reconsideration are DENIED. 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 Dated: 0m8i78 February 14, 2011 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.