Pollack v. Holanchock et al
| Marvin Arnold Pollack |
| Hogan, Peggi Healy and Howard Holanchock |
| 1:2010cv02402 |
| March 17, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Orange |
| Robert P. Patterson |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
161
OPINION & ORDER....[See document]... Plaintiff has not shown that any of the alleged delays caused by the staff at MHPFC have resulted in any way in this Court, or any court, denying him relief to which he was entitled. Accordingly, Plaintiff has not shown that his constitutional right to access to the courts has been denied as a result of the alleged actions of Defendants. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 349-350 (1996). Accordingly, his motions are denied. Each party should update the Court w ith respect to any settlement negotiations. The parties should also consider filing a consent order which would make permanent the preliminary relief this Court granted Plaintiff on September 9, 2010 so that this litigation might be terminated. (Signed by Judge Robert P. Patterson on 6/15/2012); Copies of this Order mailed/faxed by Chambers. (bw)
|
|
Filing
150
OPINION AND ORDER. Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied. At the time the instant action was commenced, Plaintiff wanted to file a civil rights action but did not have access to a law library, or an adequate substitute, and MHLS informed him that they would not represent him in a habeas proceeding or a civil rights proceeding as they only do "mental hygiene work" (Compl. at II.B 5.) The dismissal of this action and the temporary injunctive relief granted by th e Court may result in Plaintiff once again lacking an adequate law library or reasonable substitute should Plaintiff challenge his retention at MHFPC or some other civil rights claim protected by the constitution. The Court urges the parties to reach a settlement in this case. The law is well settled with respect to Plaintiff's right of access to the courts. Plaintiff must be provided with a law library or constitutionally acceptable substitute to attack his sentence or conditions of his co nfinement. See Bounds, 430 U.S. at 827. Defendants should be able to draft a consent order which will be agreeable to both parties and also terminate this action, thus preserving for Plaintiff the rights he obtained in the Court's Order of Septe mber 9, 2010. The consent order could mirror the language of the Court's September 9, 2010 Order granting Plaintiff internet access to free legal research websites such as Findlaw and Wikipedia Legal Research, as well as access to both incoming and outgoing legal correspondence so that Plaintiff may continue to attack his retention at MHFPC as well as any unconstitutional conditions of his confinement. Since MHLS already monitors and advocates for some of Plaintiff's rights and privile ges at MHPFC, see supra p. 9, it would seem appropriate for MHLS to agree to advocate for Plaintiff, if necessary, with respect to reasonable compliance with that consent order in accordance with the principles set forth in Ahlers. (Signed by Judge Robert P. Patterson on 5/9/2012) Copies Sent By Chambers via Mail and Fax. (rjm)
|
|
Filing
118
OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiff must advise the Court of the title of the legal proceeding, the nature of the proceeding, and the date and court in which it was commenced. plaintiff's failure to provide the Court with this information within thirty days (November 15, 2011) will result in the dismissal of this action for lack of standing. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Robert P. Patterson on 10/13/2011) (js)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
