Miller v. Mann et al
| Davon Miller |
| Mann, Squires, Cavagnoff, Beebe, Roach, Lightner and Rivera |
| 3:2017cv01555 |
| September 15, 2017 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| New Haven Office |
| Hartford |
| Jeffrey A. Meyer |
| Civil Rights |
| 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
65
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. For the reasons stated in the attached ruling, the Court enters the following orders:Order re motion for summary judgment. The Court GRANTS in part an d DENIES in part defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 41 ). The Court GRANTS defendants' motion for summary judgment as to plaintiff's First Amendment claim against defendant Beebe and as to plaintiff's excessive force claim against defendant Mann. The Court DENIES without prejudice to renewal by May 11, 2019, defendants' motion for summary judgment as to defendants Mann and Cavanaugh. Order re motion to compel discovery. Plaintiff's mot ion for order compelling discovery (Doc. # 51 ) is GRANTED. Defendants shall fully respond within 30 days by April 10, 2019, to plaintiff's discovery request for "[a]ny and all DR Reports, and incidents involving inmate Silver (assaults, in mates pressing charges against him, CO Assaults, etc.)," and for "Names of all C.O.'s, L.T. and Captains who were involved in stopping inmate Silver's assaults or mental outbursts." The Court interprets these requests to requ ire the disclosure of any and all incident reports, disciplinary reports, and any related documentary materials concerning any assault or other harmful contact by inmate Mark Silver since 2008 and the names of any correctional officials who were invo lved in responding to these incidents or who were otherwise made aware of these incidents. If there are any documents reflecting a prior history of assaults by Silver and knowledge by any personnel at MacDougall of Silver's prior assault history , these documents shall be produced. Plaintiff's motion for default entry (Doc. # 60 ) is DENIED as moot in light of this Court's ruling. If the parties mutually agree that they wish to pursue settlement negotiations prior to production of this discovery, then the Court will grant a consent motion for extension of this discovery deadline.Order re motion for settlement conference. Plaintiff's motion for a settlement conference (Doc. # 63 ) is GRANTED. The parties are ref erred to U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert M. Spector for a settlement conference in accordance with the terms of this ruling and order. The parties are free to conduct their own settlement negotiations if they wish.Order re case caption. The Clerk of Court shall amend the case caption to correctly identify defendant "Cavagnoff" as "Cavanaugh." It is so ordered.Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 3/11/2019. (Gondwe, N.)
|
|
Filing
15
INITIAL REVIEW ORDER PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Pursuant to the attached ruling, the Court enters the following orders: (1) Plaintiff's claims against defendants Squires, Rivera, Roach, and Lightner are DISMISSED. (2) Plaintiff& #039;s claims against defendants Mann and Cavagnoff for intentional or deliberate indifference to safety and against Mann for excessive use of force in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause shall proceed. Plaintiff's claim aga inst Beebe for preventing him from filing a grievance in violation of the First Amendment shall proceed. (3) Within twenty-one (21) days of this Order, the Clerk shall mail waiver of service of process request packets to defendants Mann, Cavagnoff, and Beebe in their individual and official capacities at MacDougall-Walker Correctional Institution, 1153 East Street South, Suffield, CT 06080. On the thirty-fifth (35th) day after mailing, the Clerk shall report to the Court on the statu s of all the requests. If any defendant fails to return the waiver request, the Clerk shall make arrangements for in-person service by the U.S. Marshals Service and the defendant shall be required to pay the costs of such service in accordance with F ederal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d). (4) Defendants shall file their response to the complaint, either an answer or motion to dismiss, within sixty (60) days from the date the notice of lawsuit and waiver of service of summons forms are ma iled to them. If the defendants choose to file an answer, they shall admit or deny the allegations and respond to the cognizable claims recited above. They may also include any and all additional defenses permitted by the Federal Rules. (5) Disco very, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 through 37, shall be completed within six months (180 days) from the date of this order. Discovery requests need not be filed with the Court. (6) All motions for summary judgment shall be filed within seven months (210 days) from the date of this order. (7) If plaintiff changes his address at any time during the litigation of this case, Local Court Rule 83.1(c)2 provides that plaintiff MUST notify the Court. Failure to do so can result in the dismissal of the case. Plaintiff must give notice of a new address even if he is incarcerated. Plaintiff should write PLEASE NOTE MY NEW ADDRESS on the notice. It is not enough to just put the new address on a letter without indicating that it is a new address. If plaintiff has more than one pending case, he should indicate all of the case numbers in the notification of change of address. Plaintiff should also notify defendants or the attorney for defendants of his new address. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 12/28/2017. (Black, R.)
|
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.
