McNeil v. Public Defender Office, No. 4:2006cv03204 - Document 17 (D. Neb. 2013)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 7 Motion to Reopen Case; 8 Motion for Subpoena; 9 Motion to Change Venue; 10 Motion to Forward the Record; 11 Motion to Amend; 12 Motion for Photocopies and Summons and 285 Forms; 13 Motion for Release; 14 Motion to Seal the Record/Case; 15 Motion for Final Judgment; and 16 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff is cautioned against filing frivolous motions. Filing frivolousmotions could result in further action by this court, including sanctions. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (JSF)

Download PDF
McNeil v. Public Defender Office Doc. 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA JAMAAL MCNEIL, Plaintiff, v. PUBLIC DEFENDER OFFICE, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 4:06CV3204 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the following motions, recently filed by Plaintiff Jamaal McNeil (“Plaintiff”): • • • • • • • • • • “Writ of Coram Nobias (All Writs/Extraordinary/Mandamus),” which the court liberally construes as a Motion to Reopen Case (Filing No. 7); “Motion for Subpoena” (Filing No. 8); “Motion for Change of Venue, Transfer, and Case Removal,” (Filing No. 9); “Motion to Forward the Record” (Filing No. 10); “Petition/Complaint/Claim Amendment,” which the court liberally construes as a “Motion to Amend Complaint” (Filing No. 11); “Motion for Photocopies and Summons and 285 Forms” (Filing No. 12); “Motion for Release (Recoupment)” (Filing No. 13); “Motion to Seal the Record/Case” (Filing No. 14); “Motion for Final Judgment to be Entered” (Filing No. 15); and “Motion for Informa Pauperis and Poverty” (Filing No. 16). Plaintiff’s motions are frivolous, nonsensical, or both. He provides no reason to reopen this matter other than to state that he would like to “present new evidence, claim damages, contract, note and etc., as required by law.” (Filing No. 7 at CM/ECF p. 1.) Moreover, this matter was dismissed and judgment was entered more than seven years ago, on September 5, 2006. (Filing Nos. 5 and 6.) Plaintiff did not appeal the court’s judgment, and the time in which to do so has long passed. Accordingly, Dockets.Justia.com no additional relief is available to Plaintiff in this matter, and no further action will be taken by this court. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. The aforementioned pending motions are denied. 2. Plaintiff is cautioned against filing frivolous motions. Filing frivolous motions could result in further action by this court, including sanctions. DATED this 16th day of October, 2013. BY THE COURT: Richard G. Kopf Senior United States District Judge *This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court. 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.