Bridges v. Murray et al

Filing 45

ORDER granting 44 Motion requiring the North Carolina Department of Correction to Allow Medical Test. Signed by Senior Judge Graham Mullen on 2/12/09. (siw)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION 1:08CV13-3-MU DANNY RAY BRIDGES, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) CHAD MURRAY, et al., ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________) ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Plaintiff's "Unopposed Motion for an Order Requiring the North Carolina Department of Correction to Allow Medical Test" filed February 11, 2009 (Doc. No. 44.) The Court having considered the Motion and the file, finds that for the reasons stated in the Motion, Plaintiff's Motion shall be granted. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: (1) Plaintiff's motion is granted and he may receive an MRI or other diagnostic test of his left shoulder; (2) Plaintiff's counsel shall work with officials at the North Carolina Department of Correction ("NCDOC") to schedule an MRI or other diagnostic test(s) as ordered by a qualified physician for purposes of diagnosing the alleged injury to Plaintiff's left shoulder; (3) The diagnostic test shall be conducted within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order unless NCDOC and Plaintiff's counsel mutually agree to a later date for the 1 test; and (4) The NCDOC shall transport Plaintiff to and from the place at which the MRI will be performed and shall ensure that Plaintiff arrives in time for the test and in time to complete any required preparatory procedures; and (5) Plaintiff and his counsel shall be responsible for arranging for payment of the costs of the ordered test and NCDOC will have no responsibility for the costs of the tests; (6) Appropriate security procedures for transporting Plaintiff to and from the test and during the test are to remain at NCDOC's discretion. SO ORDERED Signed: February 12, 2009 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?