Morris v. Bradford et al

Filing 101

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 09/26/18 GRANTING IN PART 100 Motion for Extension of time and DENYING 100 Motion for copies of documents. Plaintiff is granted 30 days from the date of this order in which to file an opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment. Any reply shall be filed and served in accordance with Local Rule 230(1). (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LEON E. MORRIS,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:11-cv-1171 TLN DB P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

A.J. R. BRADFORD, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. §

18

1983. Plaintiff alleges defendants retaliated against him in violation of his First Amendment

19

rights by denying him medication and access to the law library. Before the court are plaintiff’s

20

motions: (1) for an extension of time to file an opposition to defendants’ motion for summary

21

judgment, and (2) for copies of documents. For the reasons set forth below, the court will grant

22

plaintiff a limited extension of time and will deny his motion for copies.

23

BACKGROUND

24

Plaintiff initiated this action in 2011. The case is proceeding on his first amended

25

complaint filed September 15, 2011. (ECF No. 12.) After the court denied defendants’ motion to

26

revoke plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status and motion to dismiss, and denied in part defendants'

27

motion for summary judgment on the issue of exhaustion, defendants filed a motion for summary

28

judgment on the merits of plaintiff’s remaining two claims on January 14, 2016. (ECF No. 70.)

1

Plaintiff received numerous extensions of time to file an opposition to defendants'

2

motion. On February 14, 2017, the court stayed these proceedings because plaintiff had been

3

temporarily transferred to a psychiatric program and did not have access to his legal materials.

4

(ECF Nos. 86, 87.) When plaintiff was released from that program, he sought possession of his

5

legal materials. While most had been returned to him by March 2018, plaintiff was still missing

6

his materials from this proceeding. (See ECF No. 98 at 1-2.) The court then ordered defendants

7

to provide copies of documents identified by plaintiff as necessary to permit him to continue with

8

this action. (ECF No. 94.) In April 2018, defendants provided plaintiff with those copies. (ECF

9

No. 97.)

10

On August 27, 2018, the stay of these proceedings was lifted and plaintiff was ordered to

11

file an opposition to defendants’ summary judgment motion within thirty days. (ECF No. 99.)

12

On September 24, plaintiff filed the two pending motions. (ECF No. 100.)

13
14

PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS
Plaintiff has requested an extension of time to file an opposition to the pending motion for

15

summary judgment. (ECF No. 100.) Plaintiff explains that he has a serious mental illness that

16

requires psychotropic medications. Those medications frequently cause him to be incapacitated

17

and he has been hospitalized recently. In addition, plaintiff asks the court to order defendants to

18

provide him with copies of all documents filed in this matter because his legal documents “were

19

supposedly lost by the defendant’s co-horts while plaintiff was sent to a higher level of care”

20

from August 2016 to January 2017 and from February 2017 to March 2017.

21

With respect to the motion for an extension of time, the court notes that plaintiff has had

22

his legal materials for this case since defendants provided them to him in April, over five months

23

ago. He has had more than enough time to prepare an opposition to the summary judgment

24

motion. However, the court also recognizes that plaintiff has been hospitalized and takes

25

medications that cause him to be unable to do his legal work. Therefore, the court finds good

26

cause for a 30-day extension of time.

27
28

With respect to plaintiff’s motion for copies of all documents in this case, plaintiff does
not explain why he does not have those documents. Defendants filed a statement in April that
2

1

they had provided plaintiff with copies of the fourteen documents identified by the court and by

2

plaintiff. Plaintiff never informed the court that he did not receive those documents. Nor did

3

plaintiff file objections to the court’s recommendation that the stay of these proceedings be lifted

4

because plaintiff had possession of his legal documents from this case.

5

Plaintiff’s motion for copies will be denied. If plaintiff wishes to obtain copies of

6

documents in this case, he may contact the Clerk’s Office. That office will provide copies of

7

documents and of the docket sheet at $0.50 per page. Checks in the exact amount are made

8

payable to "Clerk, USDC." Copies of documents in cases may also be obtained by printing from

9

the public terminals at the Clerk's Office or by contacting Cal Legal Support Group at: 3104 "O"

10

Street, Suite 291, Sacramento, CA 95816, phone [phone], fax [phone].

11

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

12

1. Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 100) is granted in part.

13

2. Plaintiff is granted thirty (30) days from the date of this order in which to file an

14

opposition to defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Any reply shall be filed and served in

15

accordance with Local Rule 230(l).

16
17

3. Plaintiff’s motion for copies of documents (ECF No. 100) is denied.
Dated: September 26, 2018

18
19
20

DLB:9
DB/prisoner-civil rights/morr1171.36opp

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3