Morris v. Samuels et al, No. 1:2014cv01296 - Document 26 (D. Colo. 2014)
Court Description: MINUTE ORDER; Plaintiff's 20 Motion to Correct the Record (which the Court construes as a "Motion to Clarify") is GRANTED to the extent outlined in this order. Given the dispositive nature of Plaintiffs request, the Court may not ru le on the Motion to Reconsider 22 until a Consent Form is filed in this case. On or before 10/14/2014, the parties shall file the Consent Form Pursuant to Pilot Program to Implement the Direct Assignment of Civil Cases to Full Time Magistrate Judge s, indicating whether all parties do or do notconsent to have a United States magistrate judge conduct all proceedings in this civil action, including trial, and to order the entry of a final judgment, by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 9/12/14. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment #1, # 2 Magistrate Judge Consent Form Attachment #2)(morti, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Morris v. Samuels et al Doc. 26 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 14-cv-01296-KLM KENNETH A. MORRIS, Plaintiff, v. D. BERKEBILE, Florence ADX Warden, CORDOVA, Assistant Medical Adminstrator, HALL, Associate Warden, and ALLRED, Clinical Director Doctor, Defendants. _____________________________________________________________________ MINUTE ORDER _____________________________________________________________________ ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Correct the Record [#20] (which the Court construes as a “Motion to Clarify”) and on Plaintiff’s Motion to Reconsider [#22]. In the Motion to Clarify [#20], Plaintiff notes that Senior Judge Babcock in the Order to Draw in Part and to Dismiss in Part [#16] at 3, stated that Plaintiff sought injunctive relief for his four causes of action. Plaintiff wishes to clarify that he also seeks damages in connection with his third and fourth claims. See Second Am. Compl. [#15] at 15. Because the third and fourth claims were not dismissed in whole or in part by Senior Judge Babcock before the reassignment of the case to the undersigned, and because the Second Amended Complaint clearly states that Plaintiff is seeking both injunctive and monetary relief in connection with those claims, the Court assures Plaintiff that the mention of only injunctive relief in Senior Judge Babcock’s Order to Draw in Part and to Dismiss in Part [#16] in no way infringes on Plaintiff’s rights and claims in this lawsuit. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Clarify [#20] is GRANTED to the extent outlined above. In the Motion to Reconsider [#22], Plaintiff seeks a reconsideration of Senior Judge Babcock’s Order to Draw in Part and to Dismiss in Part [#20]. Given the dispositive nature of Plaintiff’s request, the Court may not rule on the Motion to Reconsider until a Consent Form is filed in this case. Accordingly, -1- Dockets.Justia.com IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, on or before October 14, 2014, the parties shall file the Consent Form Pursuant to Pilot Program to Implement the Direct Assignment of Civil Cases to Full Time Magistrate Judges, indicating whether all parties do or do not consent to have a United States magistrate judge conduct all proceedings in this civil action, including trial, and to order the entry of a final judgment. The Consent Form and further information is provided to the parties as an attachment to this Minute Order. Dated: September 12, 2014 -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.
