Scott v. Van Hook

Filing 18

ORDER by Magistrate Judge David W. Christel Denying Plaintiff's 8 Motion for Discovery and Withdrawal of Case Management Orders; and Denying Plaintiff's 10 Motion to Appoint Special Master. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment 1, # 2 Attachment 2, # 3 Attachment 3)(GMR- cc: pltf)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

14
15
16

RICHARD ROY SCOTT,
Case No. C04-5147RJB

17
18

Plaintiff,
v

19

MARK SELING, et al.,

20

Defendants.
______________________________________

21
22

RICHARD ROY SCOTT,
Plaintiff,

23
24
25
26

Case No. C04-5521FDB

v.
JOSEPH LEHMAN,
Defendant.

27
28

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - 1

1

RICHARD ROY SCOTT,

2
3

Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. C04-5365RJB

4
5

STEVE STULTEMEIER et al.,

6

Defendants.
______________________________________

7

RICHARD ROY SCOT,

8
9

Plaintiff.
v.

Case No. C04-5574RBL

10

BECKY DENNY, et al.,

11
12

Defendants.
______________________________________

13

RICHARD ROY SCOTT,

14

Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. C04-5582RBL

15

RICHARDS et al.,

16

Defendants.
______________________________________

17
18
19

RICHARD ROY SCOTT
Plaintiff,
v.

20

WEST DIAZ,

21

Defendant.
______________________________________

22
23
24
25
26

Case No. C04-5598RBL

RICHARD ROY SCOTT,
Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF WASHINGTON
Case No. C04-5707RBL
Defendant.

27
28

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - 2

1

RICHARD ROY SCOTT,

2
3

Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. C04-5813RJB

4

PACIFIC COUNTY et al,

5
6

Defendant.
______________________________________

7

RICHARD ROY SCOTT,
Plaintiff,

8
9

Case No. C04-5823RBL
v.

10

MARK SELING et al,

11

Defendants.
______________________________________

12

RICHARD ROY SCOTT,
Case No. C04-5896RBL

13
14

Plaintiff,
v.

15

STATE OF WASHINGTON,

16

Defendant.
______________________________________

17
18

RICHARD ROY SCOTT et al.,
Plaintiff,

19
20
21
22

Case No. C04-5505FDB

v.
JOSEPH LEHMAN,
Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION

23
24
25
26

Before the United States District Court judges who sit in Tacoma are the above listed cases filed
by plaintiff Richard Roy Scott. Mr. Scott is a civil detainee currently being housed at the Special

27
28

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - 3

1

Commitment Center operated by the State of Washington. The district court judges stayed Mr. Scott’s

2

litigation pending a decision by the court on appropriate actions to be taken in light of Mr. Scott’s

3

abusive litigation practices. A Report and Recommendation has been prepared by the magistrate judges

4

and is now before the court. The court, having reviewed, the report and recommendation of the

5

magistrate judges, objections to the report and recommendation, if any, and the remaining record,

6

does hereby find and ORDER:

7

(1)

The court adopts the Report and Recommendation.

8

(2)

In all future cases, the plaintiff shall submit a signed affidavit, along with
the proposed complaint, verifying under penalty of perjury that none of
the issues raised in the proposed complaint have been litigated in the past
by the plaintiff.

(3)

An application for in forma pauperis status, the affidavit required in
Item 1 above, and the proposed complaint shall be forwarded to the chief
judge of the district by the clerks office for review. The chief judge shall
determine whether the action should be allowed to proceed. Plaintiff
must provide full and complete disclosure of all financial information in
support of any in forma pauperis application.

(4)

Plaintiff may not engage in discovery without leave of court. To obtain leave of court he
must submit written discovery to the court for prior approval.

(5)

Plaintiff may not issue any subpoenas or summons without prior approval of the court.
To obtain prior approval, the plaintiff must show the subpoena or summons is proper.
This will be done by submitting his affidavit which clearly discloses the nature of the
information he is seeking and sets forth the name and address of the person to whom the
subpoena or summons is directed.

(6)

Plaintiff is prohibited from filing any duplicative or repetitive motion in
an action. The filing of such motions will result in monetary sanctions or
dismissal of the action.

(7)

Plaintiff shall not file a motion for reconsideration without making a
specific showing that the motion meets the criteria set forth in the local
rules for filing such a motion.

(8)

All settlement agreements with the plaintiff which include a monetary
payment shall require payment of the funds into the registry of the court
until such time as plaintiff has paid all outstanding debts for prior grants
of in forma pauperis status.

(9)

The case management order previously entered against the plaintiff shall
remain in full effect.

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - 4

1

(10)

2
3
4

All current actions are dismissed with prejudice as a sanction for Mr.
Scott’s conduct to date.

The Clerk of Court is directed to send a copy of this Order to plaintiff and to counsel for
defendants.

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Dated this 5th day of April, 2005.

A
Franklin D. Burgess
United States District Judge

A
Ronald B. Leighton
United States District Judge

A
Robert J. Bryan
United States District Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - 5