Williams v. Whitfield et al

Filing 174

ORDER granting 106 Motion to Amend. Clerk of the Court is directed to file Plaintiffs motion to amend (#106) as his Amended Complaint adding Don Ball, Dhallek, Phillips County, Ed Williams, Sheriff, and David Webber as party Defendants. denying [1 56] Motion to Compel; denying as moot 158 Motion to Amend; denying 163 Motion to Compel; denying 164 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery; denying 168 Motion to Appoint Expert. Plaintiff is hereby notified of his opportunity to file a response opposing the 151 motion for summary judgment within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 4/8/10. (dac)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT E A S T E R N DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS E A S T E R N DIVISION A L M. WILLIAMS A D C #362773 V. NO. 2:09CV00100 JLH/BD DEFENDANTS

PLAINTIFF

L O N N I E WHITFIELD, et al.

ORDER P la in tif f has filed two motions to amend (docket entries #106 and #158), two m o tio n s to compel (#156 and #163), a motion for extension of time to complete discovery (# 1 6 4 ), and a motion to appoint an expert (#168). In addition, Separate Defendant Helena R e g io n a l Medical Center has filed a motion for summary judgment (#151). I. M o tio n s to Amend In his motion to amend (#106), Plaintiff requests that Don Ball, Dhallek, Phillips C o u n ty, Ed Williams, and David Webber be added as party Defendants. In the motion, P la in tif f alleges that Sheriff Williams acted with deliberate indifference to his medical n e e d s. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion (#106) is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is d ire c ted to file Plaintiff's motion to amend (#106) as his Amended Complaint. In his m o s t recent motion to amend (#158), Plaintiff again seeks to add Sheriff Williams as a p a rty Defendant. That motion (#158) is DENIED as moot.

II.

M o tio n s to Compel In his first motion to compel, Plaintiff requests that the Court order the Phillips

C o u n ty Jail to produce discovery he has requested under the Federal Rules of Civil P ro c e d u re . Unfortunately for Plaintiff, the Phillips County Jail is not a party to this la w s u it and is not an entity that can be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See La Garza v. K a n d iyo h i County Jail, 18 Fed. Appx. 436 (8th Cir. 2001) (unpub. table op.) (affirming d is m is s a l of county jail on grounds that a jail is not an entity subject to suit under § 1983). Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion (#156) is DENIED. In his second motion to compel, Plaintiff requests that the Court order Defendants to respond to certain discovery requests (#163). Defendants have responded to Plaintiff's m o tio n and argue that they have adequately responded to Plaintiff's discovery requests. The Court agrees. Plaintiff's motion to compel (#163) also is DENIED. III. M o tio n for Extension of Time In his motion for extension of time, Plaintiff requests that the Court extend the d is c o v e ry deadline in this matter from May 5, 2010 until June 7, 2010 (#164). Plaintiff sta tes that he needs additional time because "[D]efendants refuse to cooperate in a timely e x c h an g e ." Defendants have responded to Plaintiff's motion and state that they have tim e ly responded to all of Plaintiff's discovery requests (#166). In addition, Defendants arg u e that many of Plaintiff's discovery requests are duplicative. At this time, the Court d e n ies Plaintiff's request. Plaintiff has nearly thirty (30) days to continue to engage in

2

d is c o v e ry. If he cannot complete discovery by May 5, 2010, he may file another motion a t that time. IV . M o tio n to Appoint Expert In his motion to appoint an expert, Plaintiff request that the Court appoint an in d e p e n d en t medical expert to assist, "in identifying, assessing, and qualifying medical d o c u m e n ta tio n ." At this time, Plaintiff has not shown sufficient cause to justify any such o rd e r. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion (#168) is DENIED. V. H e le n a Regional Medical Center's Motion for Summary Judgment O n March 9, 2010, Separate Defendant Helena Regional Medical Center filed a m o tio n for summary judgment (#151). Plaintiff has not yet responded to the motion. Plaintiff is hereby notified of his opportunity to file a response opposing the motion for su m m a ry judgment within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order.1 Plaintiff is a d v is e d that his response to the motion may include opposing or counter-affidavits, e x e c u te d by Plaintiff or other persons, which have either been sworn to under oath, i.e.,
1

Plaintiffs are reminded of their responsibility to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) o f the Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, w h ic h provides: "It is the duty of any party not represented by counsel to promptly notify th e Clerk and the other parties to the proceedings of any change in his or her address, to m o n ito r the progress of the case, and to prosecute or defend the action diligently. A party a p p e a rin g for himself/herself shall sign his/her pleadings and state his/her address, zip c o d e , and telephone number. If any communication from the Court to a pro se plaintiff is n o t responded to within thirty (30) days, the case may be dismissed without prejudice. Any party proceeding pro se shall be expected to be familiar with and follow the Federal R u le s of Civil Procedure."

3

n o ta riz e d , or declared to under penalty of perjury in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1746. Any affidavits submitted by Plaintiff must be based upon the personal knowledge of the p erso n executing the affidavit. No affidavit or other document containing Plaintiff's a lle g a t io n s will be considered when determining the motion for summary judgment unless it has been sworn to under oath or declared under penalty of perjury. U n d e r Local Rule 56.1 of the Rules of the United States District Court for the E a s te r n District of Arkansas, Plaintiff also is directed to file a separate, short and concise sta tem e n t setting forth the facts which they think need to be decided at a trial. IT IS SO ORDERED this 8th day of April, 2010.

____________________________________ U N IT E D STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

4