NICHOLAS DAVID PAUL SEDLOCK V 36TH DISTRICT COURT

Court of Appeals, State of Michigan
ORDER
NICHOLAS DAVID PAUL SEDLOCK V 36TH DISTRICT COURT
Docket No. 382368
Michael F. Gadola, Chief Judge, acting under MCR 7.203(F)(1), orders:
The motion to waive fees and complaint for mandamus are DISMISSED, without
prejudice, for lack of jurisdiction. For the same basic reasons this Court already explained in Sedlock v
36th District Court, unpublished order of the Court of Appeals, entered September 8, 2026 (Docket No.
382319) (Sedlock I), this Court lacks jurisdiction over the claim plaintiff seeks to assert here. In the future,
plaintiff should be aware that the proper procedural mechanisms for challenging a dismissal order like this
one—or Sedlock I—are to either file a motion for reconsideration in conformity with MCR 7.215(I) or to
seek appellate review in the Michigan Supreme Court. Plaintiff is also cautioned that, if he persists in
filing frivolous pleadings like this in the future, he may be subjected to filing restrictions as a “vexatious
litigator” under MCR 7.216(C)(3).
September 16, 2026
A true copy entered and certified by Jerome W. Zimmer Jr. , Chief Clerk, on
Date

-- 1 of 1 --