Stanford v. Tallant et al
ORDER denying 18 Motion to Compel. Signed by Honorable Barry A. Bryant on October 31, 2017. (mll)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
TIMOTHES W. STANFORD
Civil No. 4:17-cv-04081
SHIFT SUPERVISOR JANA TALLANT;
SHERIFF BRIAN MCJUNKINS, Howard
County, Arkansas; and NURSE RHONDA
HOWARD, Southwest Arkansas Mental Health
Plaintiff Timothes W. Stanford filed his Complaint in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action pro se
on September 19, 2017. (ECF No. 1). Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel. (ECF
No. 18). Defendants Bryan McJunkins and Jana Tallant have filed a Response. (ECF No. 19).
Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges he was denied adequate medical care. Plaintiff’s Motion to
Compel asks the Court to order Defendants McJunkins and Tallant to provide him copies of
grievances and access to a law library. Neither of these requests are proper for a motion to compel
at this stage of the litigation. First, Plaintiff’s requests do not specifically relate to the issues in
this lawsuit. Second Plaintiff does not have a freestanding constitutional right to a law library.
See Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 81, 828 (1977) (appointed counsel provides the “adequate assistance
from persons trained in the law” that is constitutionally required in the absence of a law library).
Plaintiff is again DIRECTED to refer to the Prison Litigation Guide for instructions on
how and when to file a motion to compel.1 If Plaintiff believes his constitutional right to access to
courts is being violated by Defendants McJunkins and Tallant he may file a supplement to his
Plaintiff previously filed a motion to compel on October 13, 2017 (ECF No. 10) requesting the same relief. The
Court denied that motion as premature as no defendant had filed an answer at the time. (ECF No. 11).
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel (ECF No. 18) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 31st day of October 2017.
/s/ Barry A. Bryant
HON. BARRY A. BRYANT
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?