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

ANTONIO JOHUNE BEASLEY, Plaintiff, v. MELANIE SNIPES, Attorney at Law, Defendant.

ORDER

CURTIS COLLIER, District Judge

Before the Court is a Rule 59(e) motion filed by Antonio Johune Beasley ("Beasley") (Court File No. 10). Beasley seeks to have this Court reconsider its dismissal of his civil rights complaint. Beasley filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 which the Court dismissed on June 19, 2006, for failure to prosecute (Court File Nos. 7 8). Presently before the Court is Beasley's Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend judgment requesting the Court to vacate its order dismissing his § 1983 complaint (Court File No. 10). Beasley asserts he will show that, due to being transferred throughout the Bureau of Prisons, he never had a stable address. Beasley contends he is attaching his inmate history as proof of this allegation. However, Beasley failed to attach any documents to his motion.

Nevertheless, the Court concludes this motion is time-barred because Rule 59 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a motion to alter or amend judgment shall be filed no later than 10 days after entry of the judgement. Beasley's motion was filed approximately four months after entry of judgment. Accordingly, Beasley's Rule 59(e) motion is DENIED (Doc. 10).

SO ORDERED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BEASLEY v. SNIPES
(Nov 1, 2006)