Einstein v. Tulsa County, 10th Cir. (2000)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsEinstein v. Tulsa County, 10th Cir. (2000)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsF I L E D
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
TENTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
JUL 27 2000
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
EINSTEIN (BOSS MAN), a/k/a
ACCOUNTABILITY BURNS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
TULSA COUNTY ELECTION
BOARD,
No. 00-5054
(D.C. No. 74-CV-153-E)
(N.D. Okla.)
Defendant-Appellee.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before SEYMOUR, Chief Judge, EBEL, and BRISCOE, Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of
this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The cause is
therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Einstein (Boss Man) a/k/a Accountability Burns appeals the district court
order denying his motions for new trial, retrial and change of venue, and his
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
*
motion to reinstate the case. The district court denied plaintiffs motion to
proceed in forma pauperis and plaintiff now seeks leave to proceed in forma
pauperis in this court.
In ruling on plaintiffs motions, the district court reviewed docket entries
24, 25, 26, 27, and 28, and concluded that the motions raised new claims and
therefore should have been pursued as new original actions. The record on
appeal consists of material from a case originally filed in 1974 and copies of
media articles, many of which are annotated by plaintiff. The record does not,
however, contain the docket entries ruled on by the district court. We therefore
have nothing to review. The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is
denied and the appeal is DISMISSED. 1
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
Stephanie K. Seymour
Chief Judge
Mr. Einsteins motion for default judgment is denied.
-2-
You might also like
- No ratings yetRoger E. Williams Herber Hammon Beth Peterson Connell J. Bateman Jesse Beagley Benjamin G. Bistline James B. Blackmore Harold W. Blackmore Florence Blackmore Cyril Bradshaw Alma J. Burnham Claude S. Cooke Donald B. Cox Earline Cox Harvey J. Dockstader Leah K. Dockstader T. David Dockstader Boyd Dockstader Marko J. Dutson George Hammon Jacob Legrande Hammon Earl Johnson James M. Pipkin Cora Fischer Stubbs David L. Stubbs John Timpson Ray Timpson Don Timpson Fayila Maureen Blackmore Williams John M. Williams Charles Williams Thomas J. Williams Joyce Blackmore Ellen Boehmer Carol Anderson, and John and Jane Does 1 Through 1000 v. United Effort Plan, a Utah Trust Rulon T. Jeffs Fred M. Jessop Leroy S. Jeffs Parley J. Harker James K. Zitting Winston K. Blackmore Truman I. Barlow Individually and as Trustees for the United Effort Plan Trust, and the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and City of Hildale, a Municipality City of Colorado City, a Municipality Washington4 pages
