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)

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