AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges

DANIEL E. MURPHY, Plaintiff, v. COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS ("CDOC"), JOE ORTIZ, PEGGY HEIL, DON MORTION, and LARRY TURNER, Defendants.

ORDER

BOYD BOLAND, Magistrate Judge

This matter is before me on the plaintiff's Motion for Clarification of Factual Issues [Doc. #31, filed 6/4/07] (the "Motion"). The defendants filed a motion to dismiss on April 13, 2007 [Doc. #25]. The plaintiff filed his response to the motion on May 3, 2007 [Doc. #29], and the defendants filed a reply in support of the motion on May 18, 2007 [Doc. #30]. The Motion does not seek clarification of any factual issues; it is a sur-reply.

The local rules of this court provide that there shall be a motion, a response, and a reply. D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1C. Further briefing is not permitted without leave of court. The plaintiff has not sought leave to file a sur-reply, nor does it appear that further briefing is necessary. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff's Motion for Clarification of Factual Issues is STRICKEN.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MURPHY v. COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
(Jul 11, 2007)