Ricks v. Adams et al

Filing 108

ORDER denying 106 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Henry L. Jones, Jr on 11/10/09. (bkp)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION JAMES E. RICKS, JR., ADC #116011 v. ED ADAMS, et al. ORDER This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's motion to compel (DE #106). Defendant has filed a response in opposition to the motion (DE #107). In support of his motion, plaintiff states defendant has failed to adequately respond to his requests for production of documents. Specifically, plaintiff states he requested criminal warrants which defendant stated he did not possess. In addition, plaintiff states he requested medical records of other inmates which defendant declined to produce. In his response, defendant states he does not possess the requested felony warrants, and that they are not relevant to plaintiff's claim of denial of adequate medical care and treatment. In addition, defendant states he has provided to plaintiff a copy of his entire jail file, defendant's witness and exhibit list, and copies of plaintiff's grievances and sick call requests. Defendant further states he can not produce medical records of other inmates or lists of inmates who were seen by the Jail doctor, because of privacy laws. In light of defendants' response to plaintiff's motion, the Court finds that plaintiff has been provided with relevant information requested, and any additional information is either protected by privacy laws or not relevant. Therefore, plaintiff's motion will be denied. Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to compel (DE #106) is hereby DENIED. 5:08CV00055HLJ DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFF 1 IT IS SO ORDERED this 10th day of November, 2009. __________________________________ United States Magistrate Judge 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?