Alexander v. Executive Director of Colorado Dept. of Corrections et al
Filing
64
MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer: Motion Hearing held on 9/19/2014. ORDERED: Plaintiff's Motion Objecting to Defendant's Response 61 is DENIED as stated on the record. Motion to Request Interro gatory Discovery 60 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDUCE as stated on the record. Motion Requesting Leave to Supplement Complaint 55 is DENIED. This Motion was filed untimely in the context of this case. This Motion is denied without prejudice in regards to Mr. Alexanders right to pursue these claims in another lawsuit. ORDERED: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint 38 is GRANTED as stated on the record. Defendants Rick Raemisch, James Falk, Kevin Milyard, Carole Soares, Jeff rey Revord, Edward Byczkowski, and Joseph Belcher are dismissed from this action WITHOUT prejudice. The Court is dismissing WITH prejudice the official capacity claims request for compensatory damages under the 11th claim, for injuries not associated with ventilation. The Court is dismissing WITHOUT prejudice the ventilation claims and all other aspects of the 11th claim. Defendants John Doe and Jane Doe listed in claims 1, 2, 11, and 20 are dismissed WITHOUT prejudice. This action is dismissed and the Court will enter a judgment accordingly. FTR: Courtroom A-402. (amont)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer
Civil Action: 13‐cv‐00647‐CBS
Date: September 19, 2014
Courtroom Deputy: Amanda Montoya
FTR – Reporter Deck‐Courtroom A402
Parties:
Counsel:
DARRICK ALEXANDER,
Pro Se (by telephone)
Plaintiff,
v.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COLORADO
DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, et al.,
Kristin Lockwood
Defendant.
COURTROOM MINUTES/MINUTE ORDER
HEARING: MOTIONS HEARING
Court in session: 01:31 p.m.
Court calls case. Appearances of counsel.
This hearing comes before the Court in regards to Plaintiff’s Motion Objecting to Defendant’s
Response [61], Motion to Request Interrogatory Discovery [60], Motion Requesting Leave to
Supplement Complaint [55], and Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint [38].
ORDERED: Plaintiff’s Motion Objecting to Defendant’s Response [61] is DENIED as stated on
the record.
Motion to Request Interrogatory Discovery [60] is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDUCE
as stated on the record.
Motion Requesting Leave to Supplement Complaint [55] is DENIED. This Motion
was filed untimely in the context of this case. This Motion is denied without
prejudice in regards to Mr. Alexander’s right to pursue these claims in another
lawsuit.
Plaintiff’s Motion to Object to the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [57] is being treated as a
Response to Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint [38].
The current named defendants are only named in the 11th claim for relief which is the subject of
Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint [38].
ORDERED: Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint [38] is GRANTED as
stated on the record. Defendants Rick Raemisch, James Falk, Kevin Milyard,
Carole Soares, Jeffrey Revord, Edward Byczkowski, and Joseph Belcher are
dismissed from this action WITHOUT prejudice. The Court is dismissing WITH
prejudice the official capacity claims request for compensatory damages under
the 11th claim, for injuries not associated with ventilation. The Court is
dismissing WITHOUT prejudice the ventilation claims and all other aspects of the
11th claim.
Defendants John Doe and Jane Doe listed in claims 1, 2, 11, and 20 are dismissed
WITHOUT prejudice.
This action is dismissed and the Court will enter a judgment accordingly.
Once the Court enters the judgment, the Plaintiff has the right to appeal the ruling. The
Plaintiff may also order a transcript of the Court’s ruling at the Court’s expense.
HEARING CONCLUDED.
Court in recess: 03:07 p.m.
Total time in court: 01:36
To order transcripts of hearings with Magistrate Judge Shaffer, please contact Avery Woods Reporting at
(303) 825‐6119 or toll free at 1‐800‐962‐3345.
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?