BANKS v. YORK et al

MOTION for Discovery Limited Discovery re: Caulfield, CCA, CTF

D.D.C.February 20, 2007

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) SIMON BANKS, ) ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 05-1514 (ESH) ) Ellen Segal Huvelle, Judge S. ELWOOD YORK, JR., ET AL. ) ) Defendants ) February 21, 2007 ____________________________________) PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LIMITED DISCOVERY REGARDING DEFENDANT CAULFIELD, CORRECTION CORPORATION OF AMERICA Comes now Simon Banks, Plaintiff, pursuant to FRCP 6(b)(1), Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, FRCP 56(f), and moves this Honorable Court for limited discovery regarding defendant Caulfied, Correction Corporation of America (CCA), and the medical contractor assigned to CCA, and Central Treatment Facility, and in support cites the following: At the present time the Plaintiff does not have sufficient facts to justify his opposition to defendant Caulfield’s motion to dismiss the third amended complaint. The Plaintiff incorporate by reference Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Law in Support of plaintiff’s Motion for discovery. The Plaintiff incorporate by reference Plaintiff’s Affidavit in support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Discovery. ________/s/____________________ Simon Banks Case 1:05-cv-01514-RCL Document 105 Filed 02/20/2007 Page 1 of 5 Case 1:05-cv-01514-RCL Document 105 Filed 02/20/2007 Page 2 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) SIMON BANKS, ) ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 05-1514 (ESH) ) Ellen Segal Huvelle, Judge S. ELWOOD YORK, JR., ET AL. ) ) Defendants ) February 21, 2007 ____________________________________) PLAINTIFF’S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LIMITED DISCOVERY REGARDING DEFENDANT CAULFIELD, CORRECTION CORPORATION OF AMERICA Plaintiff cites: 1. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1) 2. Fed. R. Civ. P. 3. Discovery is appropriate where facts and evidence needed to oppose motion to dismiss is within the exclusive control of the nonmoving party. Carmona v. Toledo, 215 F.3d 124, 133-134 (1st Cir. 2000).. 4. Rule 56(f) motions are granted in this Circuit as a matter of course as along as the moving party has been pursuing discovery diligently. Berkley v. Home Ins. Co. 68 F.3d 1409 (D.C. Cir. 1995)(any motion for summary judgment is premature until close of discovery process); Cobell v. Babitt, 30 F. Supp. 2d 24, 28-29 (D.D.C. 1998). See also, Loughlin v. United States, 230 F. Supp. 2d 26, 51 (D.D.C. 2002). Case 1:05-cv-01514-RCL Document 105 Filed 02/20/2007 Page 3 of 5 ________/s/____________________ Simon Banks Case 1:05-cv-01514-RCL Document 105 Filed 02/20/2007 Page 4 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) SIMON BANKS, ) ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 05-1514 (ESH) ) Ellen Segal Huvelle, Judge S. ELWOOD YORK, JR., ET AL. ) ) Defendants ) February ___, 2007 ____________________________________) ORDER Upon consideration of Plaintiff’s Motion for Limited Discovery regarding Defendant Caulfield, Correction Corporation of America, and employees assigned to the Central Treatment Facility, District of Columbia, it is this ____day of ________________________, 2007, HEREBY GRANTED ___________________________________ Ellen Segal Huelle, United States Judge Case 1:05-cv-01514-RCL Document 105 Filed 02/20/2007 Page 5 of 5