Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Curry v. Butler

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

June 6, 2017

STEVEN CURRY, R09761 Plaintiff,
v.
KFMBERLY S. BUTLER, WILLIAM A. SPILLER, KENT E. BROOKMAN, TODD BROOKS, SHAUN GEE, BRANDON ANTHONY and CORY BUMP Defendants.

          ORDER

          Reona J. Daly United States Magistrate Judge

         Now before the Court are several discovery related motions filed by plaintiff Steven Curry. Each will be addressed in turn.

         First, Curry filed a "Motion for Order Compelling Disclosure or Discovery." (Doc. 118). In the motion Curry seeks the production of various IDOC records. Neither party submitted the actual requests for production or defendants' responses thereto, but the defendants' filed a response in opposition (Doc. 129) and so the Court will proceed to the merits of the motion. On a related note, Curry's discovery requests appear to blur the line between interrogatories and requests for production. The Court will construe the discovery requests as requests for production, and Curry will be directed to resubmit the discovery request if it is drafted as an interrogatory.

         At ¶ 9, Curry seeks the institutional directives that concern the monitoring of inmates categorized as black stripers. The defendants shall produce such records so long as the records do not threaten institutional safety.

         At ¶ 10, Curry seeks the IDOC protective custody regulations. The defendants shall either produce the records, or contact the Menard law library and ensure that the records are available to plaintiff.

         At ¶ 11, Curry requests “plaintiff living unit [sic] since being in Menard Correctional Center.” To the extent such a document exists, the defendants shall produce it. If such a document does not exist, Curry may submit the request in the form of an interrogatory.

         At ¶ 12, Curry seeks “any video footage that can be saved on the following dates June 7, 2016, June 9, 2016, June 10, 2016 in North 2 segregation unit.” If such surveillance footage exists, the defendants are ordered to preserve it. The Court will entertain suggestions as to how the footage may be viewed by Curry.

         At ¶ 13, Curry asks the defendants to identify and provide supporting documentation as to the confidential informants that were used in issuing him the disciplinary reports. Due to institutional security reasons, the defendants' objections are sustained.

         At ¶ 14, Curry seeks photographs of the multipurpose building washroom, camera locations, and the locations of correctional officers' stations. Due to institutional security reasons, the defendants' objections are sustained.

         At ¶¶ 15 through 21, Curry requests “any and all grievance and internal investigation files” regarding defendants Butler, Brooks, Bump, Brookman, Gee, Spiller and Anthony. The Court agrees with the defendants in that the requests are overbroad and that the documents, if they exist, would be of little probative value. The defendants' objections are sustained.

         At ¶ 22, Curry asks for all incident reports that occurred in the Menard gym from January 14, 2015, until March 5, 2017, that dealt with inmate assaults or Security Threat Group activity. This request is overbroad, of questionable relevance, and will likely implicate potential security issues. Defendants' objections are sustained.

         At ¶ 23, Curry seeks “descriptions and duty's [sic] of internal affairs [series of numbers].” It is not clear what plaintiff is requesting, but the request is worded more so as an interrogatory than a request for production. The defendants are not obligated to respond to the request, but Curry is free to resubmit the request as an interrogatory.

         At ¶ 24, Curry seeks his “disciplinary ticket history since being in IDOC.” If the defendants maintain a disciplinary report summary sheet, they shall produce it. Otherwise, the defendants shall produce all of Curry's disciplinary reports since his arrival at Menard.

         The defendants shall supplement their responses in accordance with this ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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