Harvey v. Werholtz et al

Filing 104

ORDER denying 91 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; denying 92 Motion for Order; denying 99 Motion to Amend/Correct/Modify; denying 101 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; denying 102 Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. Striking 103 . By Judge R. Brooke Jackson on 7/16/2014.(trlee, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge R. Brooke Jackson
Civil Action No 13-cv-01574-RBJ-BNB
NATHANIEL JAMES HARVEY, III,
Plaintiff,
v.
CATHERINE SEGURA, in her official and individual capacity and
LT. BRET LANG, (Unit 4), in his official capacity,
Defendants.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on a number of motions recently filed by the plaintiff
[ECF Nos. 91, 92, 99, 101, & 102]. The Court hereby denies all five motions for the following
reasons:
ECF No. 91: Motion to Appoint Counsel
Mr. Harvey has filed motions for the appointment of counsel five times. [ECF Nos. 15,
26, 41, 68, 91]. His requests have already been denied four times, and at least once on the
merits. [ECF Nos. 17, 31, 46, 80]. The matter has been decided. The motion is therefore
denied.
ECF No. 92: Motion for Subpoena of Expert Witness
Mr. Harvey asks this Court to help him find an expert witness and then to subpoena that
witness. It is not the proper role of the Court to find or identify expert witnesses. That
obligation belongs to the parties. The motion is therefore denied.

ECF No. 99: Motion to Amend Newly Submitted Complaint
This motion is effectively a renewed motion which has already been denied. [ECF Nos.
97 & 98]. The Court hereby denies the renewed motion. The plaintiff is not granted leave to file
an amended complaint in this action. As such, the Third Amended Complaint [ECF No. 103]
shall be stricken as it was filed without leave of this Court.
ECF No. 101: Motion for Preliminary Injunction
The relief requested goes outside the scope of the Second Amended Complaint, and the
Court already denied leave for Mr. Harvey to amend the complaint [Doc. 98]. The Court has
also denied the renewed motion to amend the complaint [ECF No. 99] in this Order. This
motion is therefore denied.
ECF No. 102: Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915
Mr. Harvey asks this Court to permit him to proceed in forma pauperis. However, Mr.
Harvey is already proceeding as such. See June 19, 2013 Order [ECF No. 9]. The motion is
therefore denied as moot.
It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motions [ECF Nos. 91, 92, 99, 101, & 102] are
DENIED. It is further ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court will strike the Third Amended
Complaint filed at Docket #103.
DATED this 16th day of July, 2014.
BY THE COURT:

___________________________________
R. Brooke Jackson
United States District Judge