LeMaitre v. Grindstaff et al
Filing
52
ORDER denying 47 Motion/Request for the return of documents submitted in response to summary judgment motion. Signed by Chief Judge Martin Reidinger on 7/29/2022. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.) (hms)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
CIVIL CASE NO. 1:20-cv-00068-MR
WENDELL J. LEMAITRE,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
DONALD GRINDSTAFF, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_______________________________ )
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s pro se “Return
Plaintiff’s Documents…” [Doc. 47].
The incarcerated Plaintiff filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983,
addressing incidents that allegedly occurred at the Mountain View
Correctional Institution.
The Defendants filed a Motion for Summary
Judgment [Doc. 34], and the Plaintiff filed a Response and materials in
opposition to summary judgment totaling 233 pages [Doc. 40]. Summary
judgment was granted and the case was closed on May 12, 2022. [Doc. 45].
An appeal is presently pending. [See Doc. 50]. The Plaintiff now asks that
the Court send him a copy of his summary judgment response materials.
[Doc. 47].
A litigant is ordinarily required to pay his own litigation expenses, even
if he is indigent. See United States v. MacCollom, 426 U.S. 317, 321 (1976)
(“The established rule is that the expenditure of public funds is proper only
when authorized by Congress….”).
The Court declines to provide the
Plaintiff with a free copy of his voluminous summary judgment opposition
materials. The Plaintiff may, however, pay for the copies he seeks at the
standard rate of $.50 per page. See https://www.ncwd.uscourts.gov/courtfees.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s pro se “Return
Plaintiff’s Documents…” [Doc. 47] is construed as a Motion and is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: July 29, 2022
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?