Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Johnson v. Sullivan

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


September 12, 2008

GARRISON S. JOHNSON, PLAINTIFF,
v.
W.J. SULLIVAN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Arthur L. Alarcón United States Circuit Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff Garrison S. Johnson, a state prisoner in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, was recently appointed counsel by the Court. (Doc. 112). There are several matters pending before the Court.

I.

On August 26, 2008, the Court appointed counsel for Plaintiff. (Doc. 112). Since that date, Plaintiff has filed no fewer than six pleadings with this Court, wherein it appears that Mr. Johnson is unaware that counsel has been appointed to represent him. Counsel for Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to inform the Court whether Plaintiff has been informed that he is now represented by counsel.

II.

On April 21, 2008, Plaintiff, while proceeding pro se, filed a motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 65). Subsequent to the filing of Plaintiff's motion, counsel was appointed to represent Plaintiff in this matter. Counsel for Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to inform the Court, on or before September 19, 2008, whether counsel intends to supplement the motion for summary judgment with any additional briefing or other supplemental authorities, or whether the Court should consider Plaintiff's motion as it is currently filed.*fn1

III.

On August 26, 2008, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a motion for an order compelling discovery. (Doc. 113). Specifically, Plaintiff has moved the Court to order Defendants to produce, for in camera review, any documents Plaintiff is requesting, the production of which Defendants contend will create safety and security concerns for the prison. Counsel for Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to inform the Court, on or before September 19, 2008, whether counsel intends to supplement the motion for an order compelling discovery with any additional briefing or other supplemental authorities, or whether the Court should consider Plaintiff's motion as it is currently filed.

III.

On September 8, 2008, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. 127) and a declaration in support thereof (Doc. 128). Counsel for Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to inform the Court, on or before September 19, 2008, whether counsel intends to supplement the motion for a preliminary injunction with any additional briefing or other supplemental authorities, or whether the Court should consider Plaintiff's motion as it is currently filed.

IV.

Counsel for Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to inform the Court, on or before September 19, 2008, whether counsel intends to supplement the above-referenced motions, or any other motions filed by Plaintiff while he was proceeding pro se, (see e.g., Doc. 102, motion for subpoena duces tecum in support of Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment) or whether the Court should consider all such motions as they are currently filed.

Accordingly, good cause showing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. Counsel for Plaintiff shall inform the Court, no later than September 19, 2008, whether counsel intends to supplement any of the motions currently pending, filed by Plaintiff while he was proceeding pro se, with any additional briefing or other supplemental authorities, or whether the Court should consider Plaintiff's motions as they are currently filed.

2. The trial date currently scheduled for January 13, 2009 is hereby VACATED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.