Milner v. Mulligan

Filing 20

ORDER denying 19 Motion for TRO; denying 19 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 10/12/2017. (Pincus, A)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT SHAWN MILNER, Plaintiff, v. WILLIAM MULLIGAN, Defendant. : : : : : : : : : No. 3:17-cv-1341 (SRU) RULING ON MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Shawn Milner (“Milner”), currently confined at MacDougall-Walker Correctional Institution in Suffield, Connecticut, has filed a motion seeking a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction. Milner alleges that his time in Administrative Segregation has been extended as a result of two false disciplinary reports and seeks an order that he immediately be returned to general population. Preliminary injunctive relief is available only to redress injuries that are related to the conduct giving rise to the complaint. See De Beers Consol. Mines Ltd. v. United States, 325 U.S. 212, 220 (1945) (preliminary injunction appropriate to grant intermediate relief of “the same character as that which may be granted finally,” but inappropriate where the injunction “deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit”); Trowell v. Upstate Correctional Facility, 2016 WL 7156559, at *7 (N.D.N.Y. Dec. 7, 2016) (“To prevail on a motion for preliminary injunctive relief, the moving party must establish a relationship between the injury claimed in the motion and the conduct giving rise to the complaint.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). The claims in this case arose while Milner was confined at Northern Correctional Institution. He alleges that, although he suffers from a seizure disorder, he was housed in a cell without a cellmate or working emergency response button. Milner also alleges the denial of prompt medical care when he suffered a seizure. The relief requested in the motion is unrelated to the claims in this action. Because the actions underlying the claims did not give rise to the alleged injuries in the motion, preliminary injunctive relief is not warranted. Milner’s motion is denied without prejudice. Milner’s motion for temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction [ECF No. 19] is DENIED. SO ORDERED at Bridgeport, Connecticut, this 12th day of October 2017. /s/ STEFAN R. UNDERHILL Stefan R. Underhill United States District Judge 2

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?