Williams v. Peoria County, Illinois, No. 1:2010cv01365 - Document 7 (C.D. Ill. 2011)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER entered by Judge Joe Billy McDade on 3/22/2011. The Motion to Reconsider 6 is denied. (KB, ilcd)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Williams v. Peoria County, Illinois Doc. 7 E-FILED Tuesday, 22 March, 2011 05:00:23 PM Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS PEORIA DIVISION LYONE WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. PEORIA COUNTY, ILLINOIS, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 10-cv-1365 O P I N I O N and O R D E R This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Reconsideration filed by Petitioner (Doc. 6). The Motion is DENIED. On February 18, 2011, Petitioner s habeas corpus petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 was dismissed without prejudice for three reasons. First, Petitioner failed to timely submit a prison trust fund account statement in support of his motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Second, Petitioner failed to show cause why his Petition should not be dismissed because of ongoing state proceedings on the issues that he presented to this Court. Third, both items were due on December 1, 2010 and Petitioner failed to comply with the Court s Order. Therefore, his Petition was dismissed for failure to comply with this Court s Order and for the failure to prosecute. In the present Motion, Petitioner urges the Court to reconsider because he is unfamiliar with the law. Petitioner also has attached his prison trust fund account statement. The Motion, however, does not address this Court s main concern, Dockets.Justia.com namely, the existence of parallel state court proceedings on the very issues that Plaintiff raises with this Court. Nor does the motion indicate why Petitioner failed to comply with the Court s Order. Pro se litigants, while granted some leeway, are not entitled to a general dispensation from the rules of procedure or court imposed deadlines. Jones v. Phipps, 39 F.3d 158, 163 (7th Cir. 1994). Petitioner s unfamiliarity with the law would not have prevented him from following the Court s directions and submitting the necessary documents. For these reasons, the Motion to Reconsider is DENIED. Entered this 22nd day of March, 2011 s/ Joe B. McDade JOE BILLY MCDADE Senior United States District Judge 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.
