Drogosz v. Newkirk
District Court, N.D. Indiana
1Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION MICHAEL DROGOSZ, Plaintiff, v. CAUSE NO. 3:22-CV-387-DRL-MGG MARK NEWKIRK et al., Defendants. OPINION AND ORDER Michael Drogosz, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a document titled, “Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment.” ECF 10. The motion asserts it is filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), but Rule 59(e) motions “must be filed no later than 28 days after the entry of judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). The court is not permitted to enlarge this deadline. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(2). Judgment was entered…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Sandin v. ConnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Owens v. HinsleyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2011
- Gee v. PachecoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2010
- Bridges v. GilbertCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2009
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.