Breton v. Cook et al

Breton v. Cook et al

Case Number:	3:2020cv00247
Filed:	October 19, 2020
Court:	US District Court for the District of Connecticut
Office:	New Haven Office
Nature of Suit:	Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
May 13, 2021	Filing 17 INITIAL REVIEW ORDER AND RULING (see attached). Plaintiff's 15 Motion to Amend, is GRANTED as a matter of course under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1). For the reasons stated in the attached, Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment a nd Fourth Amendment claims in his operative 16 Amended Complaint shall proceed against Defendants Lieutenant John Doe, Correction Officer Doe 1, Correction Officer Doe 2, and Correction Officer Doe 3 (the "Doe Defendants"). All cl aims against Defendants Commissioner Cook and Warden Rodriguez, as well as claims that are not directed to any specific defendant, are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff's 14 Motion for Discovery is GRANTED IN PART as fol lows. The Court orders the Department of Correction ("DOC") to (1) produce the full names and current addresses of the Doe Defendants and (2) allow Plaintiff access to any footage of his intake into Northern contained on video NCI-VP-18-052 6. Plaintiffs ability to view this footage should be provided in a safe and secure way that allows Plaintiff a reasonable opportunity to observe identifying information such as nametags. Accordingly, Plaintiff is afforded an additional period of time , to and including August 13, 2021, to identify the Doe Defendants and file an amended complaint with their names in the case caption. Before this time elapses, Plaintiff should submit a discovery request, including this Ruling, to the DOC. P laintiff's failure to identify the Doe Defendants will result in a dismissal of all claims in this action. Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel, Doc. 12 at 12-16, is DENIED without prejudice to refile, and Plaintiff's Mot ion for a Temporary Restraining Order, Doc. 12 at 1-9, is DENIED.The Court takes judicial notice that Plaintiff appears to be incarcerated at Osborn Correctional Institution ("Osborn"). This conflicts with Plaintiff's representat ion in his Amended Complaint that he is currently incarcerated at Garner Correctional Institution ("Garner"). Doc. 16 at 1. Plaintiff is reminded that, if he changes his address at any time during the litigation of this case, Loc al Court Rule 83.1(c)(2) provides that he must notify the Court. Failure to do so can result in the dismissal of the case. For the present time, the Clerk is DIRECTED to send Plaintiff a copy of this ruling at both Garner and Osborn. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on May 13, 2021. (Noble, N.)
October 19, 2020	Filing 7 INITIAL REVIEW ORDER (attached). For the reasons stated in the attached Order, Plaintiffs Eighth Amendment and Fourth Amendment claims shall proceed against Defendants Lieutenant John Doe, Correction Officer Doe 1, Correction Officer Doe 2, and Corre ction Officer Doe 3. All claims against Defendants Commissioner Cook and Warden Rodriguez are DISMISSED. Because the Clerk cannot effect service on the Doe Defendants without those defendants' full names and current addresses, Plaintiff must obt ain this information through discovery and file an Amended Complaint that identifies the Doe Defendants on or before December 18, 2020. Plaintiff's failure to identify the Doe Defendants will result in the dismissal of all claims in this action. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on October 19, 2020. (Marienko, A.)

Date Filed

Document Text

May 13, 2021

Filing 17 INITIAL REVIEW ORDER AND RULING (see attached). Plaintiff's 15 Motion to Amend, is GRANTED as a matter of course under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1). For the reasons stated in the attached, Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment a nd Fourth Amendment claims in his operative 16 Amended Complaint shall proceed against Defendants Lieutenant John Doe, Correction Officer Doe 1, Correction Officer Doe 2, and Correction Officer Doe 3 (the "Doe Defendants"). All cl aims against Defendants Commissioner Cook and Warden Rodriguez, as well as claims that are not directed to any specific defendant, are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff's 14 Motion for Discovery is GRANTED IN PART as fol lows. The Court orders the Department of Correction ("DOC") to (1) produce the full names and current addresses of the Doe Defendants and (2) allow Plaintiff access to any footage of his intake into Northern contained on video NCI-VP-18-052 6. Plaintiffs ability to view this footage should be provided in a safe and secure way that allows Plaintiff a reasonable opportunity to observe identifying information such as nametags. Accordingly, Plaintiff is afforded an additional period of time , to and including August 13, 2021, to identify the Doe Defendants and file an amended complaint with their names in the case caption. Before this time elapses, Plaintiff should submit a discovery request, including this Ruling, to the DOC. P laintiff's failure to identify the Doe Defendants will result in a dismissal of all claims in this action. Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel, Doc. 12 at 12-16, is DENIED without prejudice to refile, and Plaintiff's Mot ion for a Temporary Restraining Order, Doc. 12 at 1-9, is DENIED.The Court takes judicial notice that Plaintiff appears to be incarcerated at Osborn Correctional Institution ("Osborn"). This conflicts with Plaintiff's representat ion in his Amended Complaint that he is currently incarcerated at Garner Correctional Institution ("Garner"). Doc. 16 at 1. Plaintiff is reminded that, if he changes his address at any time during the litigation of this case, Loc al Court Rule 83.1(c)(2) provides that he must notify the Court. Failure to do so can result in the dismissal of the case. For the present time, the Clerk is DIRECTED to send Plaintiff a copy of this ruling at both Garner and Osborn. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on May 13, 2021. (Noble, N.)

October 19, 2020

Filing 7 INITIAL REVIEW ORDER (attached). For the reasons stated in the attached Order, Plaintiffs Eighth Amendment and Fourth Amendment claims shall proceed against Defendants Lieutenant John Doe, Correction Officer Doe 1, Correction Officer Doe 2, and Corre ction Officer Doe 3. All claims against Defendants Commissioner Cook and Warden Rodriguez are DISMISSED. Because the Clerk cannot effect service on the Doe Defendants without those defendants' full names and current addresses, Plaintiff must obt ain this information through discovery and file an Amended Complaint that identifies the Doe Defendants on or before December 18, 2020. Plaintiff's failure to identify the Doe Defendants will result in the dismissal of all claims in this action. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on October 19, 2020. (Marienko, A.)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Breton v. Cook et al
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?