Olmstead v. Fentress County, TN et al
| Phillip David Olmstead |
| Fentress County, TN, Tony (l/n/u), Chucky Cravens, Candy Norman, Sue (l/n/u), Ginger Goodpastor, John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3 and John Doe 4 |
| 2:2016cv00046 |
| June 23, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Cookeville Office |
| Fentress |
| John S. Bryant |
| Kevin H. Sharp |
| Civil Rights |
| 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
279
MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT. Signed by Chief Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 4/10/2019. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(mg)
|
|
Filing
272
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: In this prisoner civil rights action, Plaintiff Phillip David Olmstead alleges that he was deprived of his hypertension medication while he was incarcerated at the Fentress County Justice Center (FCJC), resulting in permanent blindness in his right eye. Now pending is Olmstead's motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 37(c)(1) for discovery sanctions (Doc. No. 232 ), to which Defendants have responded in opposition (Doc. Nos. 234 , 235 ). Olmstead fi led a reply. (Doc. No. 237 .) At issue is the declaration of Olmstead's former cellmate Michael Miller, in which Miller states that the bout of high blood pressure that is the basis of Olmstead's claims was a self-induced ploy to get of fsite medical care and then smuggle tobacco and other substances back into the prison. Defendants' timely supplemented their discovery responses with the Miller declaration. Even if that were not the case, any failure to comply with Rule 26(e) (1) was harmless. For those reasons, Olmstead's motion for sanctions under Rule 37(c)(1) (Doc. No. 232 ) is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Alistair Newbern on 2/14/2019. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(mg)
|
|
Filing
226
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Defendant Southern Healthcare Partners (SHP) has filed a motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum that Plaintiff Phillip David Olmstead served on SHP on September 30, 2018. (Doc. No. 212 .) Although Olmstead did not file a respo nse in opposition to the motion to quash, his position is reflected in the joint statement of discovery issues in dispute that SHP filed with that motion. (Doc. No. 212-1, PageID# 1659.) SHP's motion (Doc. No. 212 ) is therefore GRANTED with r egard to quashing the supboena duces tecum and DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to the request for a protective order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Alistair Newbern on 11/28/2018. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(mg)
|
|
Filing
153
ORDER: Olmstead's Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint (Doc. No. 50) is GRANTED. The Clerks Office is DIRECTED to file Olmstead's Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 50-1) as a separate docket entry. The Clerk's Office is further DIRECTED to send Olmstead a service packet for the remaining defendants who have not yet appeared in this action: York, Densmore, King, Maynard, Chris Martin, and Southern Health Partners. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Alistair Newbern on 9/21/17. (xc:Pro se party by regular mail w/ 7 service packets with instructions ) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(af)
|
|
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT & ORDER: Assessing Filing Fee $350 for Phillip David Olmstead. The Clerk is instructed to send the plaintiff a service packet (a blank summons and USM 285 form) for each defendant named in the complaint. The pl aintiff will complete the service packets and return them to the Clerk's Office within twenty one (21) days of the date of receipt of this order. Upon return of the service packets, PROCESS SHALL ISSUE to the defendants. This action is REFERRE D to the Magistrate Judge to enter a scheduling order for the management of the case, to dispose or recommend disposition of any pretrial motions under 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A) and (B), and to conduct further proceedings, if necessary, under Rule 72(b), Fed.R.Civ.P., and the Local Rules of Court. The Clerk is further directed to send a copy of this order to the Warden of the Bledsoe County Correctional Complex to ensure that the custodian of the plaintiff's inmate trust acc ount complies with that portion of the Prison Litigation Reform Act relating to the payment of the filing fee. Signed by Chief Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 6/29/16. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(Warden by certified mail.)(Pro se party sent (10) pro se packets by regular mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(am) Modified Text on 6/29/2016 (am).
|
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 Tennessee Middle 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.
