Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Michael D. Harrison v. D. Adams

September 24, 2012

MICHAEL D. HARRISON,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
D. ADAMS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF'S MISCELLANEOUS MOTIONS (ECF Nos. 135, 138, 139)

Plaintiff Michael D. Harrison ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

This action is proceeding on Plaintiff's Fifth Amended Complaint filed May 3, 2011, on the allegation that Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment rights were violated because he was subject to inadequate medical care. (ECF No. 70.) Plaintiff's action proceeds against Defendants Moore, Jones, Burns, Kim, and Dava. (ECF Nos. 65 & 75.)

Before the Court are Plaintiff's following motions:

1. Motion for a new discovery order, filed September 10, 2012 (ECF No. 135);

2. Motion to file a supplemental pleading (ECF No. 138); and

3. Motion and objection to deposition (ECF No. 139). Defendants have not yet filed any oppositions to Plaintiff's motions.

I. MOTION FOR A NEW DISCOVERY ORDER

Prior to filing his current motion for a new discovery schedule (ECF No. 135), Plaintiff had filed another motion requesting the same relief (ECF No. 133).

The Court granted Plaintiff's previous motion (ECF No. 136). Accordingly, Plaintiff's current motion is denied as moot.

II. MOTION TO FILE A SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADING

Prior to Plaintiff's current motion for leave to file a supplemental pleading, the Court granted numerous other motions to amend or supplement his Fifth Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 136.) The Court has given Plaintiff until October 15, 2012 to file an amended pleading which is to be labeled as the "Eighth Amended Complaint." (Id.)

Almost immediately after the Court issued its order, Plaintiff filed a new motion to file a supplemental pleading (ECF No. 138) and lodged another amended pleading labeled a "Supplemental Amended Pleading" (ECF No. 137).

The Court is unable to determine whether Plaintiff wishes to proceed on this newest amended pleading. He did not follow the directions in the Court's September 11, 2012 order. (ECF No. 136. ) His current motion for a supplemental pleading makes it appear ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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