Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Brown v. Bledsoe

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


March 10, 2008

ROYCE BROWN, SR., PLAINTIFF,
v.
B. A. BLEDSOE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Stiehl, District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

On January 25, 2007, Plaintiff filed a Notice (Doc. 7) informing this Court that his new address is the USP-Big Sandy located in Inez, Kentucky. The Notice was accompanied by a package containing a pair of white tennis shoes. It is unclear what connection these shoes have with Plaintiff's complaint - which alleges excessive use of force and denial of medical care. Nothing in this Court's Local Rules requires or permits these shoes to be filed with the Court.

More importantly, the Court is not - nor can it be - a repository for whatever discovery material, exhibits, or other objects a prisoner plaintiff may wish the Court to "hold" for him during the pendency of his case. First, the Court simply lacks the resources to properly catalogue, mark, and store the various items that a prisoner may want to send here. Pleadings, papers, and documents can be accommodated into the Court's regular filing - tennis shoes cannot.

Second, pleadings, papers, and documents do not pose the same risks to court employees that other types of objects do. While a cursory inspection of Plaintiff's tennis shoes does not indicate the presence of any hazardous materials on them, there is no way for the Court to be completely sure that a court employee handling the shoes is not coming into contact with harmful substances or microbes contained therein.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that within thirty (30) days of the date of this Memorandum and Order that Plaintiff shall provide, in writing, the Court with the name and address of a person to whom the tennis shoes should be sent for safekeeping.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that if Plaintiff fails to provide the Court with the name and address of a person to whom the tennis shoes should be sent within the time specified, then the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to return the tennis shoes to Plaintiff at his prison address. The Court warns Plaintiff that if the tennis shoes are sent to Plaintiff at his prison address, then prison staff may decide to confiscate the tennis shoes as prohibited items.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

WILLIAM D. STIEHL DISTRICT JUDGE

20080310

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.