Villareal v. County of Fresno

Filing 32

ORDER REQUESTING the County of Fresno File the Original Additional Evidence that Plaintiff Served on it; Fourteen Day Deadline signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 6/12/2017. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 13 14 15 Case No. 1:15-cv-01410-EPG (PC) ELAINE K. VILLAREAL, 12 Plaintiff, ORDER REQUESTING THAT THE COUNTY OF FRESNO FILE THE ORIGINAL ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE THAT PLAINTIFF SERVED ON IT v. COUNTY OF FRESNO, 14-DAY DEADLINE Defendant. 16 Elaine K. Villareal (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 17 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 17, 2015, 18 Plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this action. 19 November 8, 2016, this Court allowed Plaintiff’s action to proceed against defendant County of 20 Fresno on a claim for violation of the Eighth Amendment based on unconstitutional conditions of 21 confinement. (ECF No. 7). (ECF No. 1). In an order entered 22 On January 31, 2017, defendant County of Fresno filed a motion to dismiss on the ground 23 that Plaintiff failed to properly exhaust her administrative remedies. (ECF No. 12). Plaintiff filed 24 an opposition, (ECF No. 19), and defendant County of Fresno filed a reply (ECF No. 20). The 25 Court heard oral arguments on April 7, 2017, and took the matter under submission. (ECF No. 26 25). On April 11, 2017, the Court converted the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary 27 judgment and gave both parties the opportunity to file additional evidence, as well as a reply and 28 objections to the opposing parties’ evidence. (ECF No. 26). 1 1 On May 16, 2017, defendant County of Fresno filed a reply and objections to Plaintiff’s 2 additional evidence. (ECF No. 28). Based on this, it appeared that Plaintiff served her additional 3 evidence (“Original Additional Evidence”) on defendant County of Fresno. However, Plaintiff’s 4 Original Additional Evidence was not filed with the Court. Accordingly, the Court ordered 5 Plaintiff to file her Original Additional Evidence with the Court. (ECF No. 29). 6 On June 7, 2017, Plaintiff filed additional evidence (“New Additional Evidence”). (ECF 7 No. 30). However, the New Additional Evidence is not the evidence that Plaintiff previously 8 served on defendant County of Fresno. (Id. at p. 4). In the New Additional Evidence Plaintiff 9 stated that she forgot to make copies of the Original Additional Evidence to file with the Court. 10 11 12 (Id.). The Court notes that it is Plaintiff’s responsibility to file her documents with the Court. The Court is not required to consider documents that Plaintiff does not file. 13 However, in light of the importance of the pending motion, and as Plaintiff did send a 14 copy of the Original Additional Evidence to defendant County of Fresno, and as defendant 15 County of Fresno has already filed a reply and objections to that evidence, the Court will order 16 that defendant County of Fresno file a copy of the Original Additional Evidence. 17 Accordingly, based on the foregoing, the Court orders that, within fourteen (14) days from 18 the date of service of this order, defendant County of Fresno file a copy of the Original Additional 19 Evidence.1 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 22 Dated: June 12, 2017 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 26 1 27 The Court will not make a similar accommodation in the future for Plaintiff. In the future, Plaintiff is responsible for filing the necessary papers with the Court. 28 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 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?