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.

Holt v. California Dep't of Corrections Medical Dep't

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


November 10, 2010

JUNIOR HOLT, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS MEDICAL DEPARTMENT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER RE MOTIONS

(Docs. 8, 9, 15)

Plaintiff Theodore Britton Yates ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Before the Court are three motions from Plaintiff.

On April 28, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting the Court to appoint a special investigator. Plaintiff has not cited any statute or law that empowers the Court to appoint a special investigator on Plaintiff's behalf. The Court is unaware of any authority that permits the appointment of a special investigator, and Plaintiff has not demonstrated that he is entitled to a special investigator. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion will be denied.

On April 28, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting the Court to order prison staff at the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison ("CSATF/SP") to "Relinquish Medical File of Plaintiff to the Plaintiff in a Reasonable Time." Discovery has not yet begun in this case. When the Court opens discovery, Plaintiff may propound document production requests on the defendants or request a subpoena duces tecum that orders a third party to produce the documents sought by Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiff's motion is premature and will be denied.

On August 13, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting the Court to file the exhibits attached to the motion as evidence in this action. Plaintiff is advised that the Court will not serve as a repository for the parties' evidence. Evidence should not be submitted to the court until this action reaches an appropriate stage in litigation for the submission of evidence, such as in response to a motion for summary judgment, at trial, or when specifically requested by the court. If and when this action reaches an appropriate stage in litigation for the submission of evidence, Plaintiff will not be able to refer to the exhibits attached to his motion as evidence. Evidence must be submitted at the proper time and under the proper procedures. Plaintiff is cautioned that improperly sending evidence to the Court may result in the evidence being lost or destroyed. Additionally, the Court will not return the exhibits to Plaintiff unless Plaintiff provides a postage paid return envelope. See Local Rule 101. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion will be denied.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's April 28, 2010, motion requesting a court-appointed investigator is DENIED;

2. Plaintiff's April 28, 2010, motion requesting a court order requiring prison officials to "Relinquish Medical File of Plaintiff" is DENIED; and

3. Plaintiff's August 13, 2010, motion requesting the Court to file certain exhibits as evidence is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20101110

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



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.