Carter, Jackie v. Grams, Gregory et al

Filing 82

ORDER granting defendants' Motion for Clarification, dkt. 44 in case 10-cv-280. The court's February 28, 2013 screening order in case no. 10-cv-280-wmc is amended to allow Carter to proceed on Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference cla ims regarding the provision of his shoes. Plaintiff's health-related cases, case nos. 10-cv-280-wmc, 11-cv-110-wmc and 12-cv-574-wmc, are hereby CONSOLIDATED. These cases will proceed under the schedule already set in case no. 10-cv-280-wmc, exc ept that defendants may have until July 12, 1013 to file a motion for summary judgment based on plaintiff's failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Plaintiff's First Amendment cases, case nos. 10-cv-510-wmc and 10-cv-520-wmc, are CONSOL IDATED. A telephonic preliminary pretrial conference for these cases will be held on June 27, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. before Judge Conley. Defendant shall initiate the call to the court. Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 6/6/2013. (jef),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
JACKIE CARTER,
Plaintiff,

OPINION AND ORDER

v.
GREGORY GRAMS, JANEL NICKEL,
DYLAN RADTKE, C.O. MIECHUS,
C.O. JAKUSZ, C.O. PIETROWSKI,
MARY LIESER, AMY MILLARD,
DAVID LIPINSKI, LORI ALSUM,
DIALIA SULIENE, C.O. RHODES,
ALICE ROGERS, K. LLOYD and
CAPTAIN TRATTLES,

10-cv-280-wmc
10-cv-510-wmc
10-cv-520-wmc
11-cv-110-wmc
12-cv-574-wmc

Defendants.
On April 18, 2013, this court held a telephonic preliminary pretrial conference in
case 10-cv-280-wmc. The following Opinion and Order memoralizes the court’s rulings
at that time, addresses subsequent events and sets forth a procedure for addressing
plaintiff’s remaining cases.
April 18 Order and Follow Up


Defendants' motion for clarification (dkt. 44) was granted. Defendants need not
respond to plaintiff Carter's allegations that are outside the scope of the claims on
which he was allowed to proceed, except to the extent those allegations may bear
on issues of credibility or be otherwise relevant to the claims allowed.



Carter was required to sign and file promptly an authorization for release of his
medical records. By April 25, 2013, defendants’ counsel was to notify the court in
writing: (1) the date of receipt of Carter's medical authorization or (2) Carter's
failure to provide the medical authorization.

Counsel for defendants were also

given 21 days from the date of receipt of the medical authorization to file a
response to Carter's motion for preliminary injunction.

On April 22, 2013,

defendants submitted a document stating that they received Carter’s medical
authorization and, on May 13, 2013, they filed a response to Carter's motion for
preliminary injunction.


Counsel for defendants were also to advise no later than the close of business on
April 19, 2013, who would respond to the court's concerns regarding (1) the
statements in the affidavit of Vern Stone (dkt. 47) in case 10-cv-280-wmc, which
appeared to contradict sworn representations made to this court by defendants;
and (2) plaintiff's representations that he is being denied access to his medically
authorized tennis shoes and ankle braces despite being returned to general
population.

Defendants have provided the affidavits of Karen Anderson (the

Health Services Manager at CCI) and Donald Morgan (an assistant to the security
director at CCI), detailing the current state of plaintiff’s medical care and access to
his shoes.


Counsel for defendants were to advise the court in writing by May 20, 2013,
whether they oppose consolidation of Carter's pending lawsuits in this court: 09cv-437-wmc, 10-cv-280-wmc, 10-cv-510-wmc, 110-cv-520-wmc, 11-cv-110-wmc
and 12-cv-574-wmc.

While defendants did not respond to this request,

circumstances have changed somewhat since the April 18 hearing. In particular,
the ongoing proceedings have called into question the most effective way to
consider Carter’s current claims regarding his shoes.
2

Procedures Going Forward
The court originally did not allow Carter to proceed in case no. 10-cv-280-wmc on
claims regarding the provision of his shoes, determining that the claim could be litigated
in case no. 09-cv-437-wmc. Since that time, however, the parties have filed numerous,
additional submissions regarding Carter’s shoes; and the court granted summary
judgment to defendants in case no. 09-cv-437-wmc, which focused on Carter’s claims of
past harm regarding the denial of his shoes. Because case no. 09-cv-437-wmc is now
closed and Carter wishes to pursue ongoing claims regarding the current provision of his
shoes, the court’s February 28, 2013 screening order in case no. 10-cv-280-wmc will be
amended to allow Carter to proceed on Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claims
regarding the provision of his shoes.
The court is also preparing to release screening orders in Carter’s remaining open
cases. As is discussed in each of those forthcoming orders, the claims on which Carter
will be allowed to proceed in those cases can be divided into two categories: (1) claims
related to his health and medical treatment; and (2) claims regarding prison officials’
efforts to prevent plaintiff from contacting the outside world or to retaliate against him
for attempting to do so. The court concludes that the cases can be most efficiently
litigated by consolidating the health-related lawsuits (case nos. 10-cv-280-wmc, 11-cv110-wmc and 12-cv-574-wmc); and separately consolidating the lawsuits regarding
plaintiff’s First Amendment rights (case nos. 10-cv-510-wmc and 10-cv-520-wmc). These
First Amendment cases will be set for a preliminary pretrial conference. The healthrelated lawsuits will proceed under the schedule already set in case no. 10-cv-280-wmc.
3

The only change to the existing schedule at this point, therefore, is that
defendants will be given a new deadline for a motion for summary judgment based on a
failure to exhaust administrative remedies because the existing deadline has already
passed.
Accordingly, the court now orders:
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
(1) Defendants' motion for clarification (dkt. 44 in case no. 10-cv-280wmc) is GRANTED.
(2) The court’s February 28, 2013 screening order in case no. 10-cv-280wmc is amended to allow Carter to proceed on Eighth Amendment
deliberate indifference claims regarding the provision of his shoes.
(3) Plaintiff’s health-related cases, case nos. 10-cv-280-wmc, 11-cv-110wmc and 12-cv-574-wmc, are hereby CONSOLIDATED. These cases
will proceed under the schedule already set in case no. 10-cv-280-wmc,
except that defendants may have until July 12, 1013 to file a motion for
summary judgment based on plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative
remedies.
(4) Plaintiff’s First Amendment cases, case nos. 10-cv-510-wmc and 10-cv520-wmc, are CONSOLIDATED. A telephonic preliminary pretrial
conference for these cases will be held on June 27, 2013, at 10:00 a.m.
before Judge Conley. Defendant shall initiate the call to the court.
Entered this 6th day of June, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
__________________________________
WILLIAM M. CONLEY
District Judge

4