Free Motion for Reargument - District Court of Delaware - Delaware


File Size: 81.5 kB
Pages: 3
Date: April 6, 2005
File Format: PDF
State: Delaware
Category: District Court of Delaware
Author: unknown
Word Count: 744 Words, 4,599 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ded/7771/26.pdf

Download Motion for Reargument - District Court of Delaware ( 81.5 kB)


Preview Motion for Reargument - District Court of Delaware
‘ Case 1:04-cv-00419-JJF Document 26 Filed O4/07/2005 Paget of 3
In the United States District Court
For The District Of Delaware
CATHY D. BROOKS—McCOLLUM, Civil Action No. 04-419 (JJ F)
& Emerald Ridge Service Corporation _
(Derivative) B
I I5 Emerald Ridge Drive
Bear, DE 19701 Q
(302) 832-2694 J ,’ Q in g ;
viamiirrsrs) E- °"
’— _
vs.
State Farm Insurance Company Q
Defendants ` l
MOTION FOR REARGUMENT PURSUANT DELAWARE DISTRICT COURT LOCAL RULE
7.1.5
Plaintiff hereby asks that this court reconsider its’ Order dated March 31, 2005. Plaintiff filed a
Motion For Summary Judgment against Defendant State Farm. Plaintiff filed this motion against these
defendants who are not defendants in any court other then the US District Court Of Delaware. This Order
and this Court indicates in its’ Order that Plaintiff asked this court to rule upon indemnification pursuant
an Order made in Chancery Court proceedings. Plaintiff did not ask that this court make an Order
pursuant any Order given in Chancery Court proceedings, in that this court ruled on issues and the crimes
committed by other parties and not the crimes committed by Defendant State Farm. Plaintiff asked that
this court rule upon Indemnification against State Farm pursuant the crimes they committed and asked
this in this court, because this court does govem jurisdiction of over State Farm and the issue of
Indemnification and the crimes committed by these defendants fall under the US District Courts. While,
Plaintiff is sympathetic that this court does not want to have to rule against one defendant that is govemed
under its’ jurisdiction, without contradicting the ruling of the lower court, the laws does not allow us to
incorporate our personal feelings into rulings or judgment. Plaintiff agrees that the Chancery Court
should have and should make the proper ruling in its’ court governing the defendants under their
jurisdiction, and only if the US Court Of Appeals govern all items back under that court. However, in the
meantime, Plaintiff does agree and has submitted a copy of the Motion sent to Chancery Court to make

‘ -‘ Case 1:04-cv-00419-JJF Document 26 Filed O4/07/2005 Page 2 of 3
A the proper ruling, giving it the opportunity to correct its’ error, whereby taking the responsibility away
from the US District Court to have to override a decision of one of its’ very own. However, the Chancery
Court does not govern State Farm, nor does it govern the US District’s Courts responsibility to rule upon
indemnification of parties governed in their court and under theirjurisdiction.
Whereby, Plaintiff respectfully asks that this court rule upon proper indemnification against
Defendant State Farm, Plaintiff and Emerald Ridge Service Corporation regarding the claims against
State Farm and State Farm only. One party should not have to be subjected to an injustice, because some
people fail to honor the laws set by the very parties who are here to enforce them. The courts were not
designed to protect persons for not following the laws, and incorporating feelings into laws one may not
be in agreement with.
lfthis Motion is denied, Plaintiff respectfully asks that this court continue with the appeal to the
US Court Of Appeals.
(_(g—& ( gga`€©‘.llll.` Ccgs/L.$_
Cathy D. B ks-McCollum (Pro Se)
l 15 Emerald Ridge Drive
Bear, DE 19701 2
(302) 832-2694
l
if
l
t

* Case 1:04-cv-00419-JJF Document 26 Filed O4/07/2005 Page 3 of 3
In the United States District Court
For The District Of Delaware
CATHY D. BROOKS-McCOLLUM, Civil Action No. 04-4 l9 (JJF)
& Emerald Ridge Service Corporation
(Derivative)
IIS Emerald Ridge Drive
Bear, DE 19701
(302) 832-2694
Plaintiffs(s)
vs. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
State Farm Insurance Company
Defendants
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
PROOF OF SERVICE
I Cathy D. Brooks-McCollum hereby certify that on the 2nd day of April 2005, I will and have caused
to be served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion For Reargument regular postage mail,
postage prepaid and via facsimile, upon Defendants:
Casarino, Christman & Shalk
Stephen P. Casarino
800 North King St, Suite 200
P.O. Box l276
Wilmington, DE 19899
(302) 594-4500
(302) 594-4509 Fax
Cathy D. rocks- ` lum (
I I5 Emerald Ridge Drive
Bear, DE 19701
(302) 832-2694

Case 1:04-cv-00419-JJF

Document 26

Filed 04/07/2005

Page 1 of 3

Case 1:04-cv-00419-JJF

Document 26

Filed 04/07/2005

Page 2 of 3

Case 1:04-cv-00419-JJF

Document 26

Filed 04/07/2005

Page 3 of 3