Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Winne v. Knight

United States District Court, D. Montana, Helena Division

January 20, 2017

MICHAEL WINNE, Plaintiff,
v.
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER JOSH KNIGHT, SERGEANT WEBER, and CANDICE NEUBAUER. Defendants.

          ORDER

          John Johnston United States Magistrate Judge.

         Currently pending is Mr. Winne's Objection which has been construed as a Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 50); and Defendants' Motion to Compel and Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. 57.) The motion for reconsideration will be denied. The motion to compel and motion for extension will be granted.

         A. Motion for Reconsideration

         Mr. Winne has filed a document entitled, “Plaintiff Objects to Judges' Order (Doc. 48).” The Court has construed the filing as a motion for reconsideration. Local Rule 7.3 provides as follows:

(b) Form and Content of Motion for Leave. A motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration must be limited to seven pages and must specifically meet at least one of the following two criteria:
(1) (A) the facts or applicable law are materially different from the facts or applicable law that the parties presented to the court before entry of the order for which reconsideration is sought, and
(B) despite the exercise of reasonable diligence, the party applying for reconsideration did not know such fact or law before entry of the order; or
(2) new material facts emerged or a change of law occurred after entry of the order.
(c) Prohibition Against Repetition of Argument. No motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration may repeat any oral or written argument made by the applying party before entry of the order. Violation of this restriction subjects the offending party to appropriate sanctions.

         The Court denied Mr. Winne's motion for leave to file accumulated documents from prison staff because the documents were already in the record. Mr. Winne objects to this Order by explaining why the documents were relevant to his arguments. He then asks that the documents be allowed to be part of the record. Again, the documents attached to Mr. Winne's motion to file are already part of the record. There is no need to refile these documents. The Court considered these documents in its first analysis of Defendants' motion for summary judgment and it will consider them in its final analysis of Defendants' motion. The motion for reconsideration will be denied.

         B . Motion to Compel and Motion for Extension of Time to File Supplemental Briefing

         On November 10, 2016, Defendants served Plaintiff with Special Discovery Requests pursuant to the Court's October 12, 2016 Order. (Doc. 57-1.) On December 15, 2016, Mr. Winne signed his responses to Defendants' discovery. (Doc. 57-2.) Defendants contend these responses were deficient in that Mr. Winne replies to most requests by referring Defendants to discovery.

         The Court agrees that Mr. Winne's responses are deficient and almost meaningless. The Court will require Mr. Winne to file supplemental responses to Defendants' discovery requests. Should he fail to comply, the Court will recommend the dismissal of this action.

         In making these responses, Mr. Winne is reminded of the following Local Rules and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. First, Local Rule 26.3(a)(1) requires that “Answers and objections to interrogatories pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 33 and responses and objections to requests for admissions pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 36 must identify and quote each interrogatory or request for admission in full immediately preceding the statement of any answer or objection.” Mr. Winne's discovery responses fail to comply with this rule. The Court will have the Clerk of Court provide Mr. Winne with another copy of Defendants' ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.