Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Moralez v. Moore

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

November 21, 2017

ABELARDO MORALEZ, Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL SHANNON MOORE, THOMAS WILSON, AMANDA RISKA, ROBERT D. MOORE, JASON GANZHORN, RICHARD MICHAEL KLIMMER, GERALD WHALEN, GLENN J. PAGE, PATRICK BURTCH, JENNY MORRIS, SHERIDAN SURVEYING, P.C., THOMAS TINKLEPAUGH, ADAM BROOKER, and MICHIGAN LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION, Defendants.

          Laurie J. Michelson District Judge.

          ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS FOR DISQUALIFICATION (DES 95, 99)

          ANTHONY P. PATTI UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         A. Background

         Plaintiff filed this lawsuit in pro per on February 21, 2017. Shortly thereafter, Judge Michelson referred this case to me for pretrial matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On June 21, 2017 the parties appeared in my courtroom for argument on Plaintiff's then pending motions, and I also conducted a status/scheduling conference. (DE 50.)

         The following day, I issued several rulings and recommendations, including:

• a report recommending that the Court deny Plaintiffs May 31, 2017 motions that seek injunctive relief (DEs 37 and 38);
• an order regarding Defendant Sheridan Surveying, P.C.'s April 20, 2017 letter (DE 27) and directing Defendant Sheridan Surveying, P.C. to enter an appearance of counsel;
• an order denying Plaintiff's May 31, 2017 discovery-related motions (DEs 36 and 39); and,
• an order regarding motion practice, setting deadlines and denying as moot Defendant Page's motion for a protective order staying discovery (DE 60)

(DEs 63, 64, 65, 66.)

         On July 24, 2017, Judge Michelson entered an order adopting my report and recommendation, denying Plaintiffs motions seeking injunctive relief, and partially dismissing the case. In particular, she declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs state-law claims, which amounts to dismissal of any state-law cause of action in this case. (DE 79 at 5.)

         B. Instant Motion

         On November 3, 2017, with seven defense motions to dismiss pending, Plaintiff filed what he titles a “MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF CASE DISMISSAL MAGISTATE PATTI AND CASE RE-ASSIGNMENT FROM THE CASE TRANFERENCE OF THE HONORABLE MICHELSON FOR TRIAL BUY A SPECIAL GRAND JURORS.” (DE 95 at 1-8. 10.) A duplicate of this motion was filed on November 16, 2017. (DE 99 at 1-9.)[1]

         Although these filings are difficult to decipher, Plaintiff seems to take issue with, at least: (a) the June 21, 2017 hearing, (b) the June 22, 2017 filings, and (c) the September 7, 2017 order directing the Clerk of the Court to strike certain filings by Plaintiff (DE 83 & DE 85). In addition, he seems to ask that I not be permitted to issue a report and recommendation on MLCC's motion to dismiss (DE 89) - regarding which ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.