Puerner, Lester v. Hines, David et al

Filing 39

ORDER denying as unnecessary plaintiff's 35 Motion for Court Assistance in Providing Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 9/19/16. (jef),(ps)

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

LESTER PUERNER,
Plaintiff
v.

ORDER
14-cv-781-slc

DAWN ATKINSON,
Defendant.
Plaintiff Lester Puerner is proceeding pro se on a claim that defendant Dawn Atkinson
violated his rights under the Eighth Amendment and state law by denying him compression
supports to treat blood clots in his legs. Now before the court is his motion for assistance in
responding to discovery requests he received from counsel for defendant Atkinson. Dkt. 35. In
particular, he states that he is unsure how to respond to certain requests from defendant’s
counsel for medical information. He seems to be unsure about what counsel was asking for and
in what format he should provide the information to counsel.
After plaintiff filed his motion for court assistance, defendant’s counsel wrote a letter to
plaintiff detailing precisely what information they are seeking and how plaintiff may provide that
information. Defense counsel helpfully provided a copy of the letter to the court. See dkt. 37.
This letter appears to clarify defendant’s discovery requests and it provides step-by-step
suggestions for how plaintiff may respond to these discovery requests.
In light of this letter, it is appears that there is no need for court intervention at this time.
Plaintiff should review the letter from defense counsel and consider whether he can meet the
requests contained in it. If he has further questions about defendant’s requests, or if he objects
to any of the discovery sought by defendant, he should first contact defendant’s counsel for
clarification or to voice his objections. If plaintiff remains confused after communicating with
defense counsel, then he should then feel free to contact the court again for assistance.

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Lester Puerner’s request for court assistance in
responding to discovery, dkt. 35, is DENIED as unnecessary at this time.

Entered this 19th day of September, 2016.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
STEPHEN L. CROCKER
Magistrate Judge

2