GOETSCH v. Wi Dept. of Corr. et al

Filing 66

Order granting plaintiff's request for an extension of time until 9/3/10 to file his dispositive motion. Plaintiff need not submit a separate affidavit in support of his motion if he signs his proposed findings of fact swearing that they are true under penalty of perjury. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 8/19/10. (elc),(ps)

GOETSCH v. Wi Dept. of Corr. et al

Doc. 66

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

CHAD GOETSCH, Plaintiff, v. 09-cv-228-bbc DR. LAETITIA LEY, DR. MIKE VANDENBROOK and DR. RUBIN-ASH, Defendants. ORDER

Plaintiff is proceeding in this case on his Eighth Amendment claim that defendants Dr. Laetitia Ley, Dr. Mike Vandenbrook and Dr. Rubin-Ash were deliberately indifferent to his serious mental health needs. Plaintiff has sent two letters to the court, dkts. 59-1, and 64. In a letter dated August 3, 2010, plaintiff states that he his having a nervous breakdown and relapsing into major depression. Plaintiff writes that he is contemplating the best way to kill himself, but that he will have to do it at the conclusion of this lawsuit. As plaintiff surely is aware, suicide is an extreme and irrevocable act. I encourage him to work with the mental health professionals at the institution to search out positive ways of coping with his illness. In a letter dated August 13, 2010, plaintiff writes that the intense heat and humidity have greatly aggravated his mental illness. He states that his concentration, thinking and memory are affected. Plaintiff asks if, instead of submitting a separate affidavit in support of his proposed findings of fact, he could signed the proposed findings of fact and swear under penalty of perjury that they are correct. He asserts that his proposed findings of fact are the same facts he would put in an affidavit. Because of plaintiff's asserted mental health issues and

Dockets.Justia.com

struggles with concentration, the court will allow him to do as he suggests and not require him to submit a separate affidavit in support of his dispositive motion. Also, plaintiff asks for a seven day extension from the August 27, 2010 deadline for filing dispositive motions. He says that such an extension will reduce his stress. The court will grant this extension. ORDER IT IS ORDERED that 1. Plaintiff need not submit a separate affidavit in support of his motion for summary judgment if he signs his proposed findings of fact swearing that they are true under penalty of perjury. 2. Plaintiff may have until September 3, 2010 to file his dispositive motion.

Entered this 19th day of August, 2010. BY THE COURT: /s/ STEPHEN L. CROCKER Magistrate Judge

2