Corey Jones v. Jennifer Friddell, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio denies Corey Jones’s motion for reconsideration of the denial of his request for an ex parte temporary restraining order. The court holds that Jones identified no clear error, intervening change in law, new evidence, or manifest injustice, and rejects his contention that he could revoke his consent to Ohio court jurisdiction and thereby avoid enforcement of a probation-related bench warrant.

Holdings

1. Reconsideration was unwarranted because Jones identified neither a clear error nor a looming manifest injustice in the court's prior denial of his motion for an ex parte temporary restraining order.
2. Jones could not exempt himself from the jurisdiction of Ohio courts or from compliance with applicable federal, state, or local laws by purporting to revoke his consent to jurisdiction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should reconsider its interlocutory denial of Jones's motion for an ex parte temporary restraining order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b).
2. Whether an individual may exempt himself from the jurisdiction of Ohio courts and from compliance with federal, state, or local laws by revoking purported consent to that jurisdiction.

Disposition

other