Rhymes v. Aranas et al
Filing
105
PRETRIAL ORDER re ECF Nos. 99 Proposed Joint Pretrial Order; 102 Stipulated Pretrial Disclosures : Calendar Call set for 2/3/2020 at 10:00 AM in Reno Courtroom 3 before Judge Robert C. Jones. Stacked Jury Trial set for 2/10/2020 at 8:30 AM in Reno Courtroom 3 before Judge Robert C. Jones. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 11/1/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
This case is set for jury trial on stacked calendar on February 10, 2020 at 8:30 a.m. in Reno Courtroom 3
before Judge Robert C. Jones. Calendar Call will take place on Monday, February 3, 2020 at 10:00
a.m. in Reno Courtroom 3 before Judge Robert C. Jones.
IT IS SO ORDERED
.
.
.
.
______________________
Robert C. Jones
United States District Judge
.
.
Dated:________________
November 1, 2019.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
AARON D. FORD
Attorney General
DENNIS W. HOUGH, BAR NO. 11995
Deputy Attorney General
State of Nevada
Public Safety Division
100 N. Carson Street
Carson City, NV 89701-4717
Tel: (775) 684-1254
E-mail: dhough@ag.nv.gov
Attorneys for Defendants
Cynthia Sablica, and Dwight Nevin
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
10
MICHAEL RHYMES,
Case No. 3:15-cv-00592-RCJ-CBC
Plaintiff,
11
12
v.
13
C. ROWLEY, et al.,
PARTIES’ PROPOSED JOINT PRETRIAL
DISCLOSURES PURSUANT TO FED. R.
CIV. P. 26(a)(3) (JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER)
14
Defendants.
15
Following pretrial proceedings in this case,
16
IT IS ORDERED:
17
I.
NATURE OF ACTION AND CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES
18
A.
19
This is an inmate civil rights action brought by Michael Rhymes, (Rhymes) pursuant to 42
20
U.S.C. § 1983. Rhymes is a prisoner in the custody of the Nevada Department of Corrections (NDOC),
21
currently housed at Lovelock Correctional Center (LCC). Rhymes is serving a life sentence with
22
possibility for parole for lewdness with a minor.
23
NATURE OF ACTION AND IDENTIFICATION OF PARTIES
Rhymes submitted his First Amended civil rights complaint on May 5, 2016, alleging, among
24
other things, that:
25
Defendants Sablica and Nevin were deliberately indifferent to Rhymes’ serious medical condition by
26
failing to provide a prescribed medication for Rhymes’ type 2 diabetes.
27
///
28
///
1
1
B.
2
CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES
1.
Plaintiff’s Contentions
3
Rhymes contends that Sablica failed to respond to his requests for the previously prescribed
4
medication, and that both Sablica and Nevin were aware of the situation because he spoke to each of
5
them personally about the failure to provide the prescribed medication.
6
2.
Defendant’s Contentions
Defendants contend that the evidence does not support Plaintiff’s allegations.
7
Defendants
8
incorporate any Affirmative Defenses from the Answer as it pertains to Defendants Sablica and Nevin.
9
Defendants deny that Plaintiff’s constitutional rights have been violated.
10
C.
11
Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages of $150,000 and punitive damages in the amount of
12
$75,000 dollars. Plaintiff also seeks a permanent injunction prohibiting High Desert State Prison from
13
going more than 72 hours to provide prescribed medication.
14
II.
RELIEF SOUGHT
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
This is a civil action commenced under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant
15
16
to 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
17
III.
UNCONTESTED FACTS ADMITTED BY THE PARTIES WHICH REQUIRE NO
18
PROOF
19
1.
Rhymes is, and at all times herein was, an inmate in the custody of the NDOC, currently
20
residing at Lovelock Correctional Center.
21
Complaint.
2.
22
23
Defendants Sablica, and Nevin were, during the events in question, employees of the
NDOC.
3.
24
25
Rhymes was incarcerated at all times relevant to the
On December 2013, Rhymes was prescribed Hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg, Metformen
HCL 500mg, Lisinopril 20mg, and Glipizide 5mg.
4.
26
On
January
22,
27
Rhymes
Hydrochlorothiazide, and Lisinopril.
28
2014,
///
2
requested
refills
on
Glipizide,
Metformin,
5.
1
2
and Lisinopril.
6.
3
4
On January 26, 2014, Rhymes signed for Glipizide, Metformin, Hydrochlorothiazide,
On March 5, 2014 Rhymes requested refills on Glipizide, Metformin,
Hydrochlorothiazide, and Lisinopril.
5
7.
On March 13, 2014 Rhymes was prescribed Metformin.
6
8.
On
7
15,
2014
Rhymes
signed
receipt
of
Glipizide,
Metformin,
requested
refills
for
Glipizide,
Metformin,
Hydrochlorothiazide, and Lisinopril.
9.
8
9
March
On
March
22,
2014
Rhymes
Hydrochlorothiazide, and Lisinopril.
10
10.
On March 23, 2014 Rhymes signed a receipt for Metformin
11
11.
On a date uncertain Rhymes signed a receipt for Glipizide, Metformin,
12
Hydrochlorothiazide, and Lisinopril.
13
12.
14
13.
15
On May 2, 2014, Rhymes signed for receipt of Metformin and Lisinopril.
On May 20, 2014 Rhymes submitted a kite noting he did not receive Glipizide or
Hydrochlorothiazide.
16
14.
17
15.
18
On May 27, 2014 Rhymes’ prescriptions for Glipizide, and Hydrochlorothiazide were
renewed.
16.
19
20
On May 23, 2014 Rhymes signed a receipt for Metformin and Lisinopril.
On May 29, 2014 at 6:00 a.m. Rhymes filed an informal grievance # 2006-29-79783
alleging he did not receive Glipizide or Hydrochlorothiazide.
21
17.
22
18.
23
On June 27, 2014 Rhymes requested refills of Glipizide, Metformin, Hydrochlorothiazide,
and Lisinopril.
19.
24
25
On May 29, 2014 Rhymes signed a receipt for Glipizide and Hydrochlorothiazide.
On June 28, 2014 Rhymes signed a receipt for Glipizide, Metformin, Hydrochlorothiazide
and Lisinopril.
20.
26
On
July
28,
2014
27
requested
Hydrochlorothiazide and Lisinopril.
28
Rhymes
///
3
refills
of
Glipizide,
Metformin,
21.
1
2
On
August
3,
2014
Rhymes
signed
a
receipt
for
Glipizide,
Metformin,
Hydrochlorothiazide and Lisinopril.
22.
3
On a date uncertain, while still residing at HDSP, Rhymes signed a receipt for Glipizide
4
and Hydrochlorothiazide.
5
IV.
FACTS UNADMITTED THAT WILL NOT BE CONTESTED
The following facts, though not admitted, will not be contested at trial by evidence to the
6
7
contrary: NONE
8
V.
9
10
CONTESTED ISSUES OF FACT TO BE TRIED AND DETERMINED UPON TRIAL
A.
PLAINTIFF’S CONTESTED FACTS
See First Amended Complaint.
11
B.
DEFENDANT’S CONTESTED FACTS
12
1.
Whether Plaintiff has met his burden of producing evidence supporting the facts set forth
13
above, i.e. whether he can prove that Defendant Sablica or Nevin were aware of his medical condition
14
and deliberately and maliciously ignored that situation, resulting in injury to Plaintiff.
2.
15
Whether any form of damages is available to Plaintiff for any deliberate indifference on
16
the part of Defendants Sablica or Nevin.
17
VI.
18
A.
1.
19
20
CONTESTED ISSUES OF LAW TO BE TRIED AND DETERMINED UPON TRIAL
PLAINTIFF
Whether or not Defendants Sablica and Nevin were deliberately indifferent to Plaintiff’s
serious medical issues.
21
B.
DEFENDANTS
22
1.
Did Sablica or Nevin violate Plaintiff’s constitutional rights?
23
2.
As a matter of law, is Plaintiff entitled to compensatory damages of $150,000?
24
3.
As a matter of law, is Plaintiff entitled to punitive damages of $75,000?
25
VII.
EXHIBITS
26
A.
STIPULATED EXHIBITS AS TO AUTHENTICITY AND ADMISSIBILITY
27
1.
Mr. Rhymes Medical Kites and KOP Medication Log.
28
2.
Progress Notes and Physicians Orders related to Mr. Rhymes maintained by NDOC.
4
1
B.
STIPULATED EXHIBITS AS TO AUTHENTICITY BUT NOT ADMISSIBILITY
2
1.
None.
3
C.
PLAINTIFF’S EXHIBITS SUBJECT TO OBJECTIONS
4
1.
5
2.
6
3.
7
4.
8
D.
DEFENDANTS’ EXHIBITS SUBJECT TO OBJECTIONS
9
1.
Plaintiff’s Medical file;
10
2.
Plaintiff’s Movement History Report;
11
3.
Plaintiff’s housing history report;
12
4.
Plaintiff’s Grievance file, including all relevant grievances;
13
5.
Certified Judgment(s) of Conviction of Plaintiff for underlying offense (only if needed
14
for impeachment);
15
6.
Plaintiff’s Institutional File (“I-File”);
16
7.
Plaintiff’s NDOC Central File (“C-File”);
17
8.
Law Library Logs;
18
9.
Legal Mail Logs for relevant time period;
19
10.
Law Library Brass Slips;
20
11.
Plaintiff’s Case Notes as maintained on the NDOC NOTIS system from 2014 to Present.
21
12.
All prison logs, registers, documents, or other form of data pertaining to any and all of
22
23
24
25
26
Plaintiff’s claims, especially any unauthorized mail logs or mail logs.
13.
Any and all other exhibits that may support the statements of fact and law cited herein
and to rebut Plaintiff’s statements, claims, and testimony.
14.
Any and all other exhibits that rebut witnesses that might be called to respond to claims
made by either Plaintiff or any of his proposed witnesses;
27
E.
DEPOSITIONS
28
1.
None.
5
1
VIII. WITNESSES
2
A.
3
Plaintiff wishes to reserve the right to call the following persons:
4
1.
5
2.
6
3.
7
B.
8
Defendants wish to reserve the right to call the following persons:
9
1.
Plaintiff Michael Rhymes, Inmate, Lovelock Correctional Center;
10
2.
Defendant Cynthia Sablica, c/o Dennis W. Hough, Office of Attorney General, 100 N.
11
3.
4.
5.
6.
Custodian(s) of Record for any exhibits identified above, c/o Dennis W. Hough, Office
Any and all rebuttal witnesses that might be called to respond to claims made by either
Plaintiff or any of his witnesses.
7.
20
21
Michael Koehn, c/o Dennis W. Hough, Office of Attorney General, 100 N. Carson St.
of the Attorney General, 100 N. Carson Street, Carson City, NV 89701-4717, (775) 684-1100.
18
19
Defendant Dwight Nevin, c/o Dennis W. Hough, Office of Attorney General, 100 N.
Carson City, Nevada 89701-4717.
16
17
DEFENDANT’S WITNESSES:
Carson St. Carson City, Nevada 89701-4717.
14
15
Himself.
Carson St. Carson City, Nevada 89701-4717.
12
13
PLAINTIFF’S WITNESSES:
Any and all other witnesses that have personal knowledge supporting Defendant’s
statements of fact or law cited herein.
8.
22
All witnesses identified by Plaintiff, whether or not called to testify at trial.
23
Plaintiff and Defendants reserve the right to interpose objections to the calling of any named witness
24
listed above prior to or at trial.
25
IX.
AVAILABLE TRIAL DATES
Plaintiff and Defendants’ Counsel expressly understand that the Clerk shall set the trial of this
26
27
matter at the convenience of the Court's calendar. A jury has been requested.
28
///
6
1
The following are three weeks in which both parties are available:
2
The week of February 3
3
The week of February 10
4
The week of February 24
5
X.
TIME EXPECTED FOR TRIAL
6
It is estimated that the trial herein will take a total of 2–3 days.
7
DATED this 22nd day of October, 2019.
8
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT:
9
10
11
MICHAEL RHYMES, #78115
Plaintiff Pro Se
12
13
AARON D. FORD
Attorney General
14
15
16
17
/s/ Dennis W. Hough
DENNIS W. HOUGH, BAR NO. 11995
Deputy Attorney General
Attorneys for Defendants
18
XI.
19
This case is set foris set foron stackedon the stacked calendar on _______________, 2019. Calendar call
This case jury trial jury trial calendar on February 10, 2020 at 8:30 a.m. in Reno Courtroom 3
before Judge Robert C. Jones. Calendar Call will take place on Monday, February 3, 2020 at 10:00
a.m. in Reno Courtroom 3 before Judge 2019.
will take place on _______________,Robert C. Jones.
,
,
The parties have approved the pretrial order to this action as evidenced by their signatures or the
IT IS SO ORDERED
.
signatures of their attorneys hereon, and the order is hereby entered and will govern the trial of this
.
.
case. This order may not be amended except by court order and based upon the parties’ agreement or to
.
______________________
prevent manifest injustice.
Robert C. Jones
IT
United States District Judge IS SO ORDERED
.
.
Dated:________________
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ACTION BY THE COURT
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
27
DATED:
28
7
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
1
2
I certify that I am an employee of the Office of the Attorney General, State of Nevada, and that
3
on this 22nd day of October 2019, I caused to be deposited for mailing a true and correct copy of the
4
forgoing, PARTIES’ PROPOSED JOINT PRETRIAL DISCLOSURES PURSUANT TO FED. R.
5
CIV. P. 26(a)(3) (JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER), to the following:
6
7
8
9
Michael Rhymes #78115
Care of LCC Law Librarian
Lovelock Correctional Center
1200 Prison Road
Lovelock, Nevada 89419
lcclawlibrary@doc.nv.gov
10
11
12
/s/ Perla M. Hernandez ________
An employee of the
Office of the Attorney General
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
8
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?