United States District Court, D. Hawaii
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR 90-DAY CONTINUANCE AND TO
ALLOW PLAINTIFF TO RESUBMIT CHARTS
OKI MOLLWAY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
case arises out of an ongoing state-court foreclosure
proceeding. On December 17, 2015, the court dismissed the
original Complaint in this matter, giving Plaintiff Sarah
Margaret Taylor an extended period of two months to file an
Amended Complaint. See ECF No. 23.
lives on the Big Island. Because Taylor indicated that
disabilities made it difficult for her to send materials to
this court through the United States Postal Service, and
because she has not been trained to use the court's
electronic filing system, the court issued an order
permitting Taylor to file documents with the court via e-mail
sent to firstname.lastname@example.org. Id.
This was a special accommodation fashioned to allow Taylor to
communicate with the court, which is located on the island of
February 17, 2016, Taylor sent the court a series of e-mails,
which the court deemed to be her Amended Complaint.
See ECF Nos. 25, 28-33. Although Taylor appeared to
include as Defendants all persons and entities having
anything to do with a state-court foreclosure proceeding, she
did not clearly identify who was being sued and for what.
March 2 and 8, 2016, three motions to dismiss the Amended
Complaint were filed. See ECF Nos. 43, 44, and 47.
Notices of the hearing for these motions were sent to Taylor
via the e-mail address she had earlier provided to the court,
as requested by Taylor. See ECF Nos. 45, 48.
Joinders to the motions were filed and set for hearing at the
same time as the motions. See ECF Nos. 46, 49-52. On
April 8, 2016, the court continued the hearing on the motions
and joinders to June 14, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. See ECF
No. 54. The court sent a copy of the continuance notice to
Taylor via her e-mail address. Id.
oral argument on June 14, 2016, the court ordered Taylor to
clarify her Amended Complaint by filling out and filing a
chart. The order stated that any claim not identified in the
chart would be deemed waived. See Order Requiring a
More Definite Statement. ECF No. 57. With respect to any
claim identified in the chart, Taylor was ordered to include
in her chart the paragraph number of the Amended Complaint in
which she had given Defendants notice of the claim.
filed her multi-page chart on July 12, 2016. See ECF
Nos. 65-67. Defendants were allowed to file supplemental
memoranda in light of Taylor's chart no later than August
1, 2016. Taylor had until August 19, 2016, to file a
supplemental opposition memorandum. Defendants were then
allowed to file reply memoranda no later than September 1,
2016. See ECF No. 57.
months after the court had ordered Taylor to file her chart
and had given her the August 19 deadline for filing, Taylor
sent the court via e-mail the present motion, which seeks a
90-day extension of that deadline and leave to file new
charts. See ECF Nos. 73-77. The motion is denied.
This Judge Continues to Decline to Recuse Herself From This
court's order dismissing the original Complaint, the
court noted that Taylor had named the United States District
Court as a Defendant. This judge therefore examined whether
she had to recuse herself from the case, declining to do so.
See ECF No. 23. The court stated:
Because no reasonable judge would consider Taylor's claim
against the United States District Court for the District of
Hawaii to be viable in its present form, it makes no sense
for this judge to recuse at this time. Should Taylor amend
her Complaint to assert a potentially viable claim against
the United States District ...