In Re: Carmine P. Amelio
- George Daniels
- 1:18-cv-11420
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In re Carmine P. Amelio, Judge Daniels, contains the debtor’s request to reconsider an e-filing denial, but the provided text shows no ruling.
Carmine P. Amelio, who sought permission to participate in electronic filing in the three listed matters.
What happened
In re Carmine P. Amelio concerns Carmine P. Amelio’s request for permission to file documents electronically in three federal matters. The provided text is a filing by Amelio, who identifies himself as proceeding without a lawyer.
Amelio asks the court to reconsider its May 18, 2020 order denying that request. He argues that the court should provide written factual findings and legal conclusions, and he refers to requirements for bench-trial judgments and motions for a stay during an appeal.
The provided text does not include a ruling on the request for reconsideration. Judge Daniels is identified as the judge, and no disposition appears in the supplied material.
The detailed version
- In Re: Carmine P. Amelio · No. 1:18-cv-11420
- George Daniels
- May 21, 2020
Nature of the Filing
The supplied text is titled a motion for reconsideration and request for findings of fact and conclusions of law. Carmine P. Amelio identifies himself as the debtor and as proceeding without a lawyer. He asks the court to reconsider a May 18, 2020 order that, according to the filing, denied his request to participate in electronic filing in the three listed matters.
Arguments Presented
Amelio argues that written findings of fact and conclusions of law are required in actions tried without a jury. He cites Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a)(1) and discusses the requirement that factual findings be stated separately from legal conclusions. The filing also states that Amelio intends to seek a stay pending appeal and cites Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 8, which generally requires a party to first seek a stay or related relief in the district court.
Disposition
The supplied material contains Amelio’s request but does not contain an order deciding it. Accordingly, no ruling on the motion for reconsideration, and no ruling on the request for findings, can be reported from this text.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.