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.

Quigg v. Bell

United States District Court, D. Montana, Great Falls Division

June 22, 2018

GARY L. QUIGG, Plaintiff,
v.
DARRELL BELL, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          Brian Morris United States District Court Judge.

         Plaintiffs Gary Quigg, Allen Witherall, and Timothy Schoen filed a Complaint on April 11, 2017. (Doc. 4.) The Complaint alleged, generally, denial of medical care, interference with legal access, and conditions of confinement claims against United States Marshals, and employees and medical providers at Crossroads Correctional Center in Shelby, Montana, the Yellowstone County Detention Facility in Billings, Montana, and the Big Horn County Jail in Basin, Wyoming. (Doc. 4.)

         United States Magistrate Judge John Johnston issued an Order in this matter on April 13, 2017. (Doc. 6.) Judge Johnston severed the Plaintiffs' claims, and ordered each Plaintiff to file an amended Complaint on or before May 12, 2017. (Doc 8.)

         Quigg filed his First Amended Complaint on May 10, 2017. (Doc. 13.) Quigg supplemented his Complaint on May 19, 2017. (Doc. 14.) Quigg moved to supplement additionally his Amended Complaint on June 19, 2017. (Doc. 15.)

         Judge Johnston issued an Order on November 2, 2017. (Doc. 20.) Judge Johnston granted Quigg's Motion to Supplement. (Doc. 20 at 1.) Judge Johnston screened Quigg's Amended Complaint as required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915, 1915A. Judge Johnston found that Quigg had stated a claim for denial of medical care against medical providers at Yellowstone County Detention Center. (Doc. 20 at 1.)

         Judge Johnston further found that all other allegations failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Doc. 20 at 1.) Judge Johnston indicated that he would recommend dismissal, in a subsequent order, of such claims that could not be cured by the allegation of additional facts. (Doc. 20 at 26.)

         Judge Johnston granted Quigg the opportunity to file a second amended complaint by November 30, 2017, however, regarding such claims that Judge Johnston found to possess defects that may be cured by additional factual allegations. (Doc. 20 at 27.) Judge Johnston extended this deadline to January 5, 2018, upon Quigg's motion for such relief. (Doc. 22.)

         Quigg filed Objections to Judge Johnston's April 13, 2017, and November 2, 2017, Orders on January 8, 2018. (Doc. 23 at 10.)

         I. LEGAL STANDARD

         The Court reviews for clear error when a party objects to the order of a magistrate judge. Grimes v. City and County of San Francisco, 951 F.2d 236, 241 (9th Cir. 1991). This Court must defer to the magistrate's order unless it is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Id.

         II. DISCUSSION

         Quigg raises seven objections to Judge Johnston's Order. Quigg first objects to Judge Johnston's April 13, 2017, order to sever. (Doc. 23 at 1-2.) Quigg further objects to Judge Johnston's "proposed dismissal" of all Crossroads defendants (Objection 2) and the United States Marshals Service defendants in Count 1 (Objection 3). (Doc. 23 at 2-6.) Quigg's remaining objections concern Counts for which Judge Johnston granted Quigg leave to amend. (Doc. 23 at 6-8.)

         A. Severance

         Judge Johnston ordered that Plaintiffs Quigg, Witherall, and Schoen must proceed separately on their own claims. (Doc. 8 at 2.) Judge Johnston noted that the Ninth Circuit has not addressed the issue of whether multiple pro se prisoner-plaintiffs may join their claims together. Id. Upon an analysis of the relevant Rules of Civil Procedure and statutes governing prisoner litigation, Judge Johnston concluded: 1) that severance minimized the potential conflict between the Prison Litigation Reform Act's (PLRA) mandate that each prisoner-plaintiff pay the full filing fee and the statute's concurrent prohibition on collection of fees in excess of the fee imposed for commencement of a civil action; 2) that severance avoided the danger that a pro se prisoner might be penalized under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 for inaccurate factual statements made by a co-plaintiff; 3) that severance prevents pro se prisoner-plaintiffs from circumventing the "three strikes rule" by joining ...


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.