Coleman v. Hakala et al

Filing 145

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER..IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant's Motion to Strike Portions of Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint (#100) is DENIED.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion for Leave to IdentifyWitness Specifically as Expert Pursuant to Rule 26 (#139) is GRANTED.. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 9/26/16. (MRS)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION ALONZO DWAYNE COLEMAN, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL HAKALA, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 1:13-CV-61 SNLJ MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on defendants’ Motion to Strike Portions of Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint (#100) and plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Identify Witness Specifically as Expert Pursuant to Rule 26 (#139). Plaintiff is an inmate in the Missouri Department of Corrections. Plaintiff filed his Complaint on April 17, 2013. He alleges deliberate indifferent to serious medical needs arising from the care and treatment provided by defendants for plaintiff’s polycystic kidney and liver diseases. Plaintiff was appointed counsel on May 2, 2014, and the parties engaged in substantial discovery thereafter. In February 2016, plaintiff’s counsel asked to amend plaintiff’s complaint for a third time. The Third Amended Complaint asserts a new claim regarding care provided for plaintiff’s hypertension and administration of blood pressure medication. Defendants seek an order striking that new claim from the complaint because, in order to defend it, they will need additional discovery. Trial is not until January 2017, leaving ample time for discovery regarding this discrete matter. To the extent counsel needs additional time, the Court will consider a motion to continue the trial date. 1 Expert discovery closed on June 1, 2015. Plaintiff now wishes to identify Dr. Jared Flood as an expert witness to offer medical opinions on polycystic kidney disease, its progression, treatment options, treatment and diagnostic testing, and medical causation. Dr. Flood is one of plaintiff’s treating prison internists. In light of the fact that Dr. Flood is apparently among plaintiffs’ identified, treating physicians who was in fact employed or contracted by the prison, the late addition of Dr. Flood imposes very little prejudice. The Court will again consider motions for additional time that counsel may require as a result of this addition. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant’s Motion to Strike Portions of Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint (#100) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Identify Witness Specifically as Expert Pursuant to Rule 26 (#139) is GRANTED. Dated this 26th day of September, 2016. STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR. 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?