Preacher v. Wiley
MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 24 Motion for Order for Permissive Intervention and Motion to Attend Preliminary Scheduling/Status Conference by Telephone filed by proposed intervenors George Scalf, Damani Nantambu, David Baxter and Robert Utley by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 4/20/09.(erv, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 09-cv-00278-CMA-MEH LUKE PREACHER and MIKEAL GLENN STINE, Plaintiffs, v. RON WILEY, Warden ADX-Florence, B. A. BLEDSOE, Warden USP Marion, J. FOX, Associate Warden ADX-Florence, MARK COLLINS, Unit Manager ADX-Florence, GEORGE KNOX, Conselor ADX-Florence, J. MANLEY, Lieutenant ADX-Florence, TINA SUDLOW, Case Manager ADX-Florence, CORR. OFFICER MANSPEAKER, ADX-Florence, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BREAM, ADX-Florence, J. D. WALTERS, Lieutenant ADX-Florence, CORR. OFFICER BARBARA BATULIS, ADX-Florence, and JOHN DOE, Unknown Person, Defendants. MINUTE ORDER Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on April 20, 2009. Pending before the Court is a Motion for Permissive Intervention and Motion to Attend Preliminary Scheduling/Status Conference by Telephone filed by proposed intervenors George Scalf, Damani Nantambu, David Baxter and Robert Utley [filed April 27, 2009; docket #24]. The motion is construed as a request to intervene in the instant litigation,1 and is denied without prejudice for failure to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(c)'s requirement to file a motion "stat[ing] the grounds for intervention," which must "be accompanied by a pleading [here, a complaint] that sets out the claim or defense for which intervention is sought" (emphasis added).
Intervention is a procedure by which an outsider with an interest in a lawsuit may come in as a party though the outsider has not been named as a party by the existing litigants. 7C Wright, Miller & Kane, Federal Practice & Procedure § 1901 (3d ed. 2007).
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?