Dismuke v. Long et al
| LaShawn W. Dismuke |
| Long, Colon, Maldinado, Kevin D. Roy and Scott Semple |
| 3:2016cv01336 |
| August 5, 2016 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| New Haven Office |
| Tolland |
| Michael P. Shea |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
30
For the reasons set forth in the attached, the Court hereby rules as follows: 1. The Defendants' Second Motion for Extension of Time [ECF No. 20] until April 5, 2017 to file a response to the complaint is GRANTED absent objection and for good cause shown. The Defendants' Supplemental Statement in Support of the Second Motion for Extension of Time [ECF No. 23] is DENIED as improperly filed as a motion for extension of time.2. The Plaintiff's Motion f or Appointment of Counsel [ECF No. 16] is DENIED without prejudice to refiling at a later stage of litigation. Any renewal of this motion shall be accompanied by a summary of any attempts to obtain counsel or legal assistance, including the n ames of the attorneys contacted, the dates upon which the plaintiff made those contacts and the reasons why assistance was unavailable. 3. The Plaintiff's Motion for Extension [ECF No. 18] to conduct discovery is DENIED. The Pl aintiff's "Motion for Extension Nunc Pro Tunc" [ECF No. 21] to receive documents is DENIED. The Motion for Discovery, Disclosure and Inspection [ECF No. 22], which is actually a request for discovery is DENIED as improp erly filed with the Court. 4. Because the Plaintiff may amend the complaint as of right, the Motion to Amend [ECF No. 27] is DENIED as moot, and the Motion to Dismiss, [ECF No. 24] is DENIED without prejudice. The Plaintiff may file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days of the date of his order. If the Plaintiff chooses not to file an amended complaint within the time specified, the case will proceed as to the claims remaining in the Complaint as set forth in the Court's Initial Review Order, ECF No. 7, and the Defendants may simply file a short statement renewing their motion to dismiss and incorporating by reference their prior briefing. Further, if the Plaintiff chooses to amend his complaint , and if Defendants choose to renew their motion to dismiss, Defendants may incorporate by reference their prior briefing and/or may file a supplemental brief. 5. Finally, the parties shall complete discovery within ninety (90) days of the da te of this order, i.e., November 8, 2017. Motions for summary judgment, if any, must be filed within one-hundred and twenty (120) days of the date of this order, i.e., December 8, 2017. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 8/10/2017. (Howard, H.)
|
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 Connecticut 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.
