Bailey v. Coffman et al

Filing 19

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (See Full Order.) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction [ECF No. 15 ] is DENIED. Signed by District Judge E. Richard Webber on 10/30/2015. (CBL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
SHAWN BAILEY,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
BRITNEY COFFMAN, et al.,
Defendants,

No. 4:15CV968 ERW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff moves for a preliminary injunction prohibiting defendant Steven Brouk from
“harassing” him. The motion is denied.
Plaintiff brought this suit for excessive force. He alleged that Brouk and others assaulted
him while he was in handcuffs and used pepper spray on him after he was subdued.
In the instant motion, plaintiff alleges that Brouk searched his cell while he was
showering. He says that on his return he found some of his notes pertaining to this lawsuit torn
apart in the toilet. He believes that Brouk tore up the papers to harass him. And he is concerned
that Brouk will prevent him from effectively prosecuting this action.
To determine whether preliminary injunctive relief is warranted, the Court must balance
threat of irreparable harm to movant, the potential harm to nonmoving party should injunction
issue, the likelihood of success on merits, and the public interest. Dataphase Sys. v. CL Sys., 640
F.2d 109, 113-14 (8th Cir. 1981) (en banc).
After balancing these factors, the Court finds that injunctive relief is not appropriate at
this time. Brouk is currently represented by counsel, and any efforts by Brouk to interfere with
this action can be dealt with during the course of this case. Plaintiff has not suffered any injury

in this case. He has successfully brought claims against the named defendants, and each of the
defendants has answered his claims. Discovery will proceed forthwith. Finally, the public
interests prevent the Court from interfering with prison operations absent extraordinary
circumstances, which do not exist here.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction [ECF No.
15] is DENIED.
So Ordered this 30th day of October, 2015.

E. RICHARD WEBBER
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2