Green v. Bannister et al

Filing 59

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS - Motion Hearing held on 3/19/2013 before Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb. Crtrm Administrator: Katie Lynn Ogden; Pla Counsel: Matthew Green, In Pro Per (Telephonically); Def Counsel: Brian W. Hagen; FTR #: 9:34:18 a.m. - 10:26:05 a.m.; Time of Hearing: 9:30 a.m.; Courtroom: 2. After the court and parties address several motions the court finds the following: plaintiffs 42 Motion to Compel is GRANTED, as to securing answers to the interrogatories. Defendant shall provide answers to the interrogatories no later that Tuesday, April 2, 2013; Plaintiffs 46 Motion for Order Directing Prison Officials to Allow Inmate Christopher Williams to Assist Plaintiff in Litigating this Action is GRANTED in part as to components 1, 2, 5 and 6, and DENIED in part as to components 3 and 4; Defendants 53 Motion for Leave to Amend Admission is GRANTED; The court construes plaintiffs 49 Motio n for Order Directing U.S. Marshal to Serve Summons & Complaint as a Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Defendant Graham and to Issue Summons as to Defendant Graham, and with good cause appearing, plaintiffs motion is GRANTED. Service shal l be completed by Monday, April 22, 2013; In light of Mr. Hagens representation that he will contact the prison to schedule a date and time for plaintiff to review his medical file, plaintiffs 51 Motion to Allow Plaintiff to Review His Medi cal File is DENIED as moot. The court agrees that additional time is warranted for plaintiff to respond to defendant's 54 Motion for Summary Judgment; therefor, plaintiff shall have up to and including Friday, May 3, 2013 to file a response. The court schedules a Status Conference for Wednesday, April 24, 2013, at 9:30 a.m., in Reno Courtroom 2, before Magistrate Judge Cobb. The Office of the Attorney General shall arrange for the plaintiff to be present by telephone and shall contact the courtroom administrator, Katie Lynn Ogden, at [phone], at least two (2) days prior to the hearing to advise her of the number where Plaintiff may be reached at the time of the hearing. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KO)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
MATTHEW GREEN,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
ROBERT BANNISTER,
)
)
Defendants.
)
___________________________________ )

3:12-cv-00004-LRH-WGC
MINUTES OF THE COURT
March 19, 2013

PRESENT: THE HONORABLE WILLIAM G. COBB, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DEPUTY CLERK:

Katie Lynn Ogden

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF:

REPORTER:

FTR

Matthew Green, In Pro Per (Telephonically)

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT(S):

Brian W. Hagen

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS: Motion Hearing
9:34 a.m. Court Convenes.
The court and parties address several motions. After hearing argument and good cause
appearing the court orders the following:
I.

Motion to Compel (Dkt. #42)

Mr. Hagen represents that responses to plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents
and Request for Admissions have been provided to Mr. Green. Mr. Hagen indicates that
defendant has only received pages one and six of the plaintiff’s interrogatories and have therefore
not responded to the interrogatories as of today’s date.
The court explains that all of plaintiff’s discovery requests have been attached to
Document #42, including interrogatories (pages 19-27). The court expresses its concern
regarding defendant’s failure to timely respond to plaintiff’s interrogatories; however, the court
will allow additional time for defendant to respond to the interrogatories.
Therefore, plaintiff’s Motion to Compel (Dkt. #42) is GRANTED, as to securing
answers to the interrogatories. Defendant shall provide answers to the interrogatories no later
that Tuesday, April 2, 2013.

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
3:12-cv-00004-LRH-WGC
Date: March 19, 2013
Page 2
II.

Motion for Order Directing Prison Officials to Allow Inmate Christopher Williams
to Assist Plaintiff in Litigating This Action (Dkt. #46)

Plaintiff requests that Inmate Christopher Williams assist him throughout this litigation,
which shall include six (6) components: (1) attend hearings with plaintiff, (2) prepare pleadings
for plaintiff, (3) review plaintiff’s medical file, (4) review plaintiff’s I-file, (5) assist in settlement
conference and other meetings, and (6) confer with plaintiff on a regular basis (see Dkt. #46,
pages 2-3). Defendant does not express any objection to components 1, 2, 5 and 6; however,
defendant does object to components 3 and 4 based on concerns regarding confidentiality and
complying with institutional policies.
At this time, the court agrees with defendant’s concern with respect to maintaining
confidentiality and complying with institutional policies. Therefore, plaintiff’s Motion for Order
Directing Prison Officials to Allow Inmate Christopher Williams to Assist Plaintiff in Litigating
this Action (Dkt. #46) is GRANTED in part as to components 1, 2, 5 and 6, and
DENIED in part as to components 3 and 4.
III.

Motion for Leave to Amend Admission (Dkt. #53)

Mr. Hagen indicates that defendant’s response to Request for Admission No. 10 is
incorrect and is seeking to revise the response as proposed in the “Amended Response to Request
for Admission No. 10” (Dkt. 53, page 2). Plaintiff has no opposition allowing defendant
Bannister the opportunity to correct and accurately respond to Request for Admission No. 10.
Good cause appearing, the court will allow defendant Bannister to amend his response;
therefore, defendant’s Motion for Leave to Amend Admission (Dkt. #53) is GRANTED. The
court notes that plaintiff does not need to respond to Dkt. #53, as it is now disposed of.
IV.

Oral Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion for Summary Judgment

In view of the extension granted by this court for defendant to answer interrogatories,
plaintiff requests additional time to respond to defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment
(Dkt. #54). Defendant has no objection to allow for additional time for plaintiff to respond to
defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
The court agrees that additional time is warranted. Plaintiff shall respond to defendant’s
Motion for Summary Judgment no later than Friday, May 3, 2013.

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
3:12-cv-00004-LRH-WGC
Date: March 19, 2013
Page 3
V.

Motion for Order Directing U.S. Marshal to Serve Summons & Complaint
(Dkt. #49)

Plaintiff explains that he has identified an address for defendant Graham and requests that
the court review and compare the current address that has been filed under seal to that of the
alternative address provided by plaintiff (see Dkt. #49). Thereafter, and if the addresses are
different, plaintiff requests that the U.S. Marshal effect service as to defendant Graham with the
alternative address. Defendant has no objection to plaintiff’s request to attempt service once
again as to defendant Graham.
The court construes plaintiff’s Motion for Order Directing U.S. Marshal to Serve
Summons & Complaint (Dkt. #49) as a Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Defendant
Graham and to Issue Summons as to Defendant Graham, and with good cause appearing,
plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED. Service shall be completed by Monday, April 22, 2013.
The Courtroom Administrator is directed to send the following to plaintiff: (1) USM-285
form, (1) copy of complaint (Dkt. #4), (1) copy of this order (Dkt. #59). Plaintiff shall thereafter,
provide the U.S. Marshal with the necessary documents to effect service as to defendant Graham.
VI.

Status Conference Date and Time

The court is inclined to schedule a status conference to follow-up on the status of
defendant Graham’s service, as well as address any discovery deadlines that may need to be
amended based on the outcome of service as to Graham. The court schedules a Status
Conference for Wednesday, April 24, 2013, at 9:30 a.m.
VII.

Motion to Allow Plaintiff to Review His Medical File (Dkt. #51)

The court explains that plaintiff shall follow institutional procedures with regard to
reviewing his medical file, such as submitting a kite. Plaintiff explains that from previous filings
by defendant, it is his impression that he may only be allotted one hour and one time per year to
review his medical records.
It is the court’s understanding that, under standard review, inmates are afforded a one
time / one hour opportunity to review medical files; however, when an inmate is actively
litigating a matter with the court, accommodations are made so that the inmate has additional
opportunities to review his medical file. Mr. Hagen agrees and reiterates that inmates are to
submit a kite in order to review their medical file.

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
3:12-cv-00004-LRH-WGC
Date: March 19, 2013
Page 4
Mr. Hagen indicates that he will contact the prison to schedule a date and time
(approximately two (2) hours) for plaintiff to review his medical file. Mr. Hagen further states if
additional time, past the approximate two (2) hours, is needed for plaintiff’s review he will
request additional time to be afforded to plaintiff.
In light of Mr. Hagen’s representation that he will contact the prison to schedule a date
and time for plaintiff to review his medical file, plaintiff’s Motion to Allow Plaintiff to Review
His Medical File (Dkt. #51) is DENIED as moot.
VIII. Motion to Compel Production of Document (Dkt. #50)
Mr. Hagen explains that he will be filing a response to this discovery dispute, which is
due March 21, 2013. Thereafter, plaintiff will be filing a reply to defendant’s responses. In light
of the parties’ representation, plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Production of Document (Dkt. #50)
will be addressed when it has been fully briefed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
10:26 a.m. Court Adjourns.
LANCE S. WILSON, CLERK

By:

/s/
Katie Lynn Ogden, Deputy Clerk