Cramer v. Dickinson et al

Filing 39

ORDER Denying 38 Request for Relief from Provisions of Local Rule 230(1), signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 11/1/11. (Verduzco, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LATANYA CRAMER, 12 13 14 1:08-cv-00375-AWI-GSA-PC Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM PROVISIONS OF LOCAL RULE 230(l) (Doc. 38.) v. S. DICKINSON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 / 17 18 Latanya Cramer (“Plaintiff”) is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 19 pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the 20 Complaint initiating this action on March 17, 2008. (Doc. 1.) This action now proceeds on the 21 Fifth Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff on September 15, 2011, against defendants S. 22 Dickinson and Patricia A. Johnson on Plaintiff's claims for excessive force in violation of the 23 Eighth Amendment. (Doc. 35.) 24 On October 31, 2011, defendant S. Dickinson ("Defendant") filed a request for relief from 25 Local Rule 230(l), whose provisions apply to motions in prisoner cases. (Doc. 53.) 26 Defendant notes that although Plaintiff was incarcerated at the outset of this lawsuit, Plaintiff 27 was released from prison long before Defendant was served with process in this action, as 28 indicated from Plaintiff's change of address filed on August 31, 2009. (Doc. 19.) Due to 1 1 Plaintiff’s release from custody, Defendant requests the Court to release Defendant from the 2 requirements of Local Rule 230(l) in this action.1 3 Local Rule 230 governs the Court’s civil motion calendar and procedure. Rule 230(l) 4 provides exceptions to the rule for motions in prisoner cases, defined as “cases wherein one party 5 is incarcerated and proceeding in propria persona.” L.R. 230(l). The main exception to the rule 6 is that motions in prisoner cases are “submitted upon the record without oral argument unless 7 otherwise ordered by the Court.” Id. 8 9 At the time Plaintiff’s action was filed, Plaintiff was incarcerated at a correctional institution and proceeding in propria persona. Therefore, the Court designated the case as a 10 prisoner case. (See Court Docket.) As noted by Defendant, on August 31, 2009, Plaintiff filed a 11 notice of change of address, indicating her residence at a street address in Los Angeles, 12 California. (Doc. 19.) 13 Defendant correctly observes that, due to Plaintiff’s change in custody, this case does not 14 currently fit within the definition of a prisoner case as stated in Rule 230(l). However, for 15 practical reasons, when a case is designated a prisoner case at the Court, the designation usually 16 remains the same until the case is closed. The Court is obligated by law to follow distinctly 17 different rules and procedures when managing prisoner case litigation, and continuity is 18 necessary for the Court to manage its docket. Although not an indication of what may occur in 19 this case, it is not uncommon for a prisoner who is released from custody to later return to 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Local Rule 230(l) provides: "All motions, except motions to dismiss for lack of prosecution, filed in actions wherein one party is incarcerated and proceeding in propria persona, shall be submitted upon the record without oral argument unless otherwise ordered by the Court. Such motions need not be noticed on the motion calendar. Opposition, if any, to the granting of the motion shall be served and filed by the responding party not more than twenty-one (21),days after the date of service of the motion. A responding party who has no opposition to the granting of the motion shall serve and file a statement to that effect, specifically designating the motion in question. Failure of the responding party to file an opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion and may result in the imposition of sanctions. The moving party may, not more than seven (7) days after the opposition is served, serve and file a reply to the opposition. All such motions will be deemed submitted twenty-eight (28) days after the service of the motion or when the reply is filed, whichever comes first. See L.R. 135." L.R. 230(l). 2 1 custody, only to be released again at a later time. This Court has hundreds of pending prisoner 2 cases, and it would create an enormous burden, with little benefit, to change the designation of a 3 case, along with the resultant procedural changes, with each change of a litigant’s custody status. 4 For these reasons, this case shall remain a prisoner case at this time, and Defendant's motion shall 5 be denied. 6 7 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's motion to be released from the provisions of Local Rule 230(l) in this action is DENIED. 8 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 6i0kij November 1, 2011 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?