IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
July 25, 2006
HERMAN TOWNSEND, INMATE #K53674, PLAINTIFF,
DIRECTOR WALKER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Foreman, District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action is before the Court to rule on Plaintiff's motion to vacate judgment, filed pursuant to Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Doc. 11). Such a motion may only be granted if movant shows there was mistake of law or fact or presents newly discovered evidence that could not have been discovered previously. Matter of Prince, 85 F.3d 314 (7th Cir. 1996), reh'g and suggestion for reh'g en banc denied, cert. denied 117 S.Ct. 608; Deutsch v. Burlington Northern R. Co., 983 F.2d 741 (7th Cir. 1993).
Upon review of the record, the Court remains persuaded it was correct in finding that Plaintiff had three strikes, and also in dismissing the case with prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to pay the full filing fee as directed, notwithstanding the fact that he had sought to voluntarily dismiss the case. Therefore, the instant motion is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
James L. Foreman DISTRICT JUDGE
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.