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.

Pattersonn v. Stibbrr

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

July 9, 2019

RICKY PATTERSON, Plaintiff,
v.
STIBBRR, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          HON. REONA J. DALY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery (Doc. 39). Defendants filed a response (Doc. 41). Plaintiff is proceeding in this case on two counts: Fourteenth Amendment due process claim and First Amendment retaliation claim. The Court reviews each of Plaintiff's Interrogatories and Requests for Production and Defendants' responses thereto, as set forth below:

         1. Interrogatory: The disciplinary histories of Defendants Steber, Cooper, Henton, and Givens.

         Response: Defendants object arguing employment files of State employees are presumptively confidential. Defendants further object the interrogatory is overbroad in time and scope, irrelevant, and not proportional to the needs of the case.

         Ruling: The Court finds this request is irrelevant and not proportional to the needs of the case. Plaintiff's request to compel any further response to this request is DENIED.

         2. Interrogatory: Who made the appointments (of Cooper/Henton) to the Adjustment Committee?

         Response: Defendant Cooper responded he was appointed to the adjustment committee in 2001 by Warden Michael Neal. Defendant Henton responded he was appointed to the adjustment committee in July 2007 by Warden Lee Ryker. Defendant Henton became an alternate chairperson on the adjustment committee on October 20, 2016, when he was approved by Assistant Warden of Operations Russell Goins.

         Ruling: The Court finds Defendants sufficiently answered this interrogatory. Plaintiff's request to compel any further response to this request is DENIED.

         3. Request: Any and all policies and directives governing legal mail delivery and reception on January 12, 2007, and a list of any and all legal mail delivered to Plaintiff while held in Lawrence from 2016 to 2017.

         Response: Defendants objected to this interrogatory as this case was severed from Plaintiff's claims involving his legal mail (17-1067). Defendants, however, provided Plaintiff with the Illinois Administrative Code section involving inmate legal mail and the institutional directive on legal mail.

         Ruling: Defendants are ORDERED to supplement the response to this request and provide Plaintiff any list of the legal mail delivered to him while he was housed at Lawrence in 2016 and 2017.

         4. Request: Any and all documents that set the policy and procedure pertaining to the use, storage, retrieval, and disposition of video tapes and all other storage for media used to record images.

         Response: Defendants' response to this request is not included. This request, however, is similar to Request #9 set forth below.

         Ruling: The Court finds this request is irrelevant and not proportional to the needs of the case. Plaintiff's request to compel any ...


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.