Stewart v. Timberlake et al

Filing 23

Order that Plaintiff has until 3/31/2010 to submit materials in support of his motion for preliminary injunctive relief. Defendants have until 4/14/2010 to file a response. Signed by Chief Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 3/16/2010. (eds),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FO R THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN --------------------------------------------R O N A L D STEWART, ORDER Plaintiff, 0 9 - cv -6 8 7 - b b c v. K AR EN E. TIMBERLAKE, JOHN EASTERDAY and STEVE WATTERS, D efendan ts. --------------------------------------------Plaintiff is proceeding in this case on his claims that defendants violated his First Am endm ent right to access video games and his rights under Wisconsin's mental health act, W is. Stat. § 51.61(1)(e). In an order dated February 26, 2010, I gave plaintiff another chan ce to submit materials in support of his motion for a preliminary injunction because his su bm issio n s did not comply with this court's procedures on obtaining injunctive relief. Now plaintiff has filed a motion for a preliminary injunction and affidavit in support that are near ly identical to his original submissions. Because plaintiff has not cured the defects in his prior submissions, I will give him one final chance to submit materials in support of his m otio n that comply with this court's procedures.

1

T he first problem is that the statement of proposed facts plaintiff has included in his m otio n is not in compliance with the court's procedures. In many of his findings of fact, p lain tiff provides conclusory statements about his claims instead of factual propositions. As an example, plaintiff has proposed that "being prohibited from video games is not necessary to his treatment, is in excess of defendants' authority . . . and that defendants are not able to demonstrate that video gaming is in any honest assessment a real treatment, safety or secu rity concern in regard to the plaintiff." Dkt. #20, ¶3. Proposed facts such as this do not pro vide a factual explanation for something that happened in the case. A second problem is that plaintiff's documentary evidence is not admissible because no ne of the exhibits have been authenticated. They have not been attached to an affidavit in which a person who has personal knowledge of what the exhibits are declares under penalty of perjury or swears under oath that the exhibits are true and correct copies of the docum ents they appear to be. For example, if plaintiff wants to submit a copy of an in stitu tio n policy that is the subject of this lawsuit, and he obtained the policy from defendan ts during the discovery phase of this proceeding, he should prepare an affidavit in w hich he declares under penalty of perjury that the exhibit (identified by the number he gave it) is a true and correct copy of the policy he received from defendant during discovery. As I explained to plaintiff in the February 26 order, he should describe what happened to him as if he were telling a story to someone who does not know anything about the case,

2

explaining what each defendant did and when they did it. Then plaintiff should explain w hat affidavit or other piece of evidence he has to support each finding, and he should attach each document to his findings. He should focus on explaining specific events and not rely on generalizations or conclusions he has about the case. Because plaintiff failed to comply with this court's procedures to be followed on m otio ns for injunctive relief, I will give him a final chance to comply with these procedures. (Plaintiff has already received a copy of these procedures but I will send him another copy w ith this order. He is urged to read them carefully.) Also, I will return the documents plaintiff attached to his affidavit so that he can use them in preparing his findings of fact. Plaintiff will have until March 31, 2010 to submit his proposed findings of fact and evidence in support of his findings. Defendants will have until April 14, 2010 to respond.

ORDER IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff may have until March 31, 2010 to submit materials in support of his motion for preliminary injunctive relief that complies with the court's

3

pro cedures. Defendants have until April 14, 2010 to file their response E n tered this 16t h day of March, 2010. B Y THE COURT: /s/ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ B AR B AR A B. CRABB D istrict Judge

4