Alexander, et al v. CA Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation, et al

Filing 102

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 7/21/14 ORDERING that Mr. Price's ex parte request for pre-approval of expenditures is DENIED without prejudice. Counsel for Plaintiffs is free to resubmit his request to address the Court's concerns. If the information in the request contains privileged or purportedly confidential information, then counsel for Plaintiffs should so state. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

JONATHAN NICHOLAS ALEXANDER,
et al.,
Plaintiffs,

13
14
15
16
17

No. 2:11-cv-00640-TLN-CKD

ORDER
v.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
AND REHABILITATION, et al.,
Defendants.

18
19

This action arises out of the death of Plaintiffs’ father (“the decedent”) while he was

20
incarcerated. The operative complaint alleges that the decedent was incarcerated by the
21

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”) after being convicted of child

22
molestation. (Third Am. Compl., ECF No. 91 at 2.) Plaintiffs allege that the CDCR and various
23
government and prison officials permitted decedent to be housed in the same cell as an inmate
24
named Lydon, who had previously been convicted of strangling his cellmate. Lydon confessed to
25
strangling the decedent to death. Subsequently, Plaintiffs brought this action alleging claims for
26
failure to protect, deprivation of due process and right to parent/child relationship, deliberate
27
indifference to serious medical needs, supervisory liability pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and
28
1

1
2

state claims for wrongful death and failure to furnish/summon medical care. (ECF No. 91.)
On March 21, 2011, Plaintiff Jonathon Alexander was appointed as guardian ad litem to

3

represent the interests of his sister, Plaintiff Amber Alexander, an incompetent person confined to

4

a mental institution. (Order, ECF No. 9.) On September 12, 2013, this Court appointed Jeff

5

Dominic Price as counsel to represent Plaintiffs. (Order, ECF No. 50.)

6

The Court is in receipt of Mr. Price’s ex parte request for pre-approval of expenditures

7

submitted to the pro bono program administrator for the United States District Court, Eastern

8

District of California. After reviewing the request, the Court DENIES the request WITHOUT

9

PREJUDICE. It is not clear to the Court how the requested information is relevant to the parties

10

in this action, relevant to the claims alleged, or relevant to the relief sought. Additionally,

11

Defendants Cate and Salinas have filed a motion to dismiss (ECF No. 94) which may narrow the

12

claims and/or defendants in this action.

13

Counsel for Plaintiffs is free to resubmit his request to address the Court’s concerns. Such

14

request should be submitted to the pro bono program administrator for the United States District

15

Court, Eastern District of California. If the information in the request contains privileged or

16

purportedly confidential information, then counsel for Plaintiffs should so state.

17

IT IS SO ORDERED.

18

Dated: July 21, 2014

19
20
21

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2