Gibson v. Campbell et al

Filing 134

MINUTE ORDER Denying 131 Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel ; Denying Without Prejudice 132 Plaintiff's Motion for Order Directing the Attorney General to Produce Documents. by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 9/27/2010.(erv, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 09-00983-WYD-KLM WELLMAN E. GIBSON, Plaintiff, v. ANNA MARIE CAMPBELL, C. HOLST, AIC, SHIRLEY STEINBECK, MARSHALL GRIFFITH, LT. STEINBECK, and DOCTOR ASSEN, Defendants. _____________________________________________________________________ MINUTE ORDER _____________________________________________________________________ ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion Requesting Appointment of Counsel [Docket No. 131; Filed September 27, 2010] ("Motion No. 131"). This is at least Plaintiff's third request for the appointment of counsel. The present Motion contains no compelling justification for revisiting Plaintiff's prior request for counsel. Despite Plaintiff's alleged dexterity and medical problems, the Court notes that Plaintiff is able to repeatedly file voluminous, coherent, type-written pleadings. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Motion No. 131 is DENIED for the reasons given in Order #71. Unless Plaintiff's case proceeds to trial, all future requests for appointment of counsel will be summarily stricken. This matter is also before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion Requesting Order Directing the Attorney General to Produce Documents [Docket No. 132; Filed September 27, 2010] ("Motion No. 132"). As a preliminary matter, absent the Court's subpoena-enforcement authority, the Court cannot compel a nonparty, here the Attorney General, to produce documents. Assuming the discovery request at issue was propounded on counsel for Defendants, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Motion No. 132 is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff shall refile it in compliance with D.C.COLO.LCivR 37.1, which requires that the moving party set forth verbatim the discovery request at issue and the response received. In addition, any future motion requesting discovery must contain the date the discovery request was propounded on counsel for Defendants and provide a legal basis for ordering the nonmoving party to provide the discovery at issue pursuant to Local Rule 7.1C. Dated: September 27, 2010