Hall v. Montana State Prison et al

Filing 38

ORDER. Motion for TemporaryRestraining Order 35 is DENIED. Defendants shall have until April 1, 2015, to respond to Mr. Hall's 7 request for preliminary injunction. Signed by Judge Dana L. Christensen on 3/17/2015. Mailed to Hall. (TAG, )

FILED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
HELENA DIVISION

MAR 17 2015
Clef!<, l!·S District Court
District Of Montana
Missoula

CV 14-00011-H-DLC-RKS

STACY HALL,
Plaintiff,

ORDER

vs.
LEROY KIRKEGARD, MYRON BEESON,
ROSS SWANSON, TOM WOODS,
CANDYCE NEUBAUER, BILLIE REICH,
ROXANNE WIGERT, DAN HESS, MICHELE
STEYH, ALVIN FODE, SHEILA HASTINGS,
JOHN DOE, JANES/JANE DOE,
Defendants.

Plaintiff Stacy Hall has filed a Second Motion for a Temporary Restraining
Order and Preliminary Injunction seeking an order protecting his access to legal
materials and personal legal property from further "impedance [sic], frustration,
and obstruction." (Doc. 35.) Mr. Hall is a Montana state prisoner proceeding in
forma pauperis and without counsel. He alleges he was transferred to South
Dakota in November 2014 and his property, including his legal documents were
seized. Between November 2014 and January 2015, Mr. Hall did not have access
to his legal documents. (Hall Affidavit, Doc. 35-1 at 1.) His property was
returned to him in January 2015 but was seized on March 4, 2015 when he was

1

transferred to a different facility. (Hall Affidavit, Doc. 35-1 at 2.)
Mr. Hall's Motion for temporary restraining order will be denied. Rule 65
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a temporary restraining order
may be granted without written or oral notice to the adverse party or that party's
attorney if: (1) it clearly appears from specific facts shown by affidavit or by the
verified complaint that immediate and irreparable injury, loss or damage will result
to the applicant before the adverse party or the party's attorney can be heard in
opposition, and (2) the applicant's attorney (plaintiff himself in this case, as he
proceeds pro se) certifies in writing the efforts, if any, which have been made to
give notice and the reasons supporting the claim that notice should not be
required. Fed.R.Civ.P. 65(b). Mr. Hall has not satisfied either requirement.
The Court will however, consider Mr. Hall's motion for preliminary
injunction.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion for Temporary
Restraining Order (Doc. 35) is DENIED. Defendants shall have until April 1,
2015 to respond to Mr. Hall's request for
DATED this \

-=f~ay of March, 2

reliminary injunction. (Doc. 7.)
1

Dana L. Christensen, Chief Judge
United States District Court
2