From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Grant v. Knipp

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Dec 10, 2013
2:11-cv-2302 KJM KJN P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 10, 2013)

Opinion


DARRAN GRANT, Plaintiff, v. WILLIAM KNIPP, et al., Defendants. No. 2:11-cv-2302 KJM KJN P United States District Court, E.D. California. December 10, 2013

          ORDER

          KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.

         Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel. This civil rights action is proceeding on the complaint filed August 30, 2011. Defendant Palomares filed a motion for summary judgment, which is presently submitted for decision. However, in his deposition, plaintiff claims that defendant Palomares cuffed plaintiff's hands prior to the alleged use of excessive force. (Pl.'s Depo. at 22.) However, defendant did not address such testimony in the motion for summary judgment.

Defendant Knipp was dismissed by order filed November 23, 2011. (ECF No. 11.)

         Conversely, in plaintiff's statement of undisputed facts, plaintiff did not dispute (ECF No. 37 at 1, 2-3) the defendant's undisputed fact No. 19: "Once on the ground, Officer Palomares ordered Grant to place his hands behind his back. Grant complied and Officer Palomares applied handcuffs." (ECF No. 30-3 at 3.) Plaintiff did not address his deposition testimony on this issue. In his complaint plaintiff states, under penalty of perjury, that the hearing officer asked plaintiff's questions of defendant in the subsequent rules violation report hearing, including:

Q: Why didn't you just tell me to put my hands on my head to cuff me up?

A: I utilized the authorized cuffing techniques that I believed would best insure my safety.

(ECF No. 1 at 6.)

         Accordingly, within seven days, defendant shall address plaintiff's testimony as to the timing of the handcuffing in the context of his motion. Plaintiff's reply shall be filed fourteen days thereafter. The court is not inclined to grant extensions of time for either party.

         IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within seven days from the date of this order, defendant shall file further briefing concerning plaintiff's deposition testimony that he was handcuffed prior to the use of force herein. Plaintiff's reply shall be filed fourteen days thereafter.


Summaries of

Grant v. Knipp

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Dec 10, 2013
2:11-cv-2302 KJM KJN P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 10, 2013)
Case details for

Grant v. Knipp

Case Details

Full title:DARRAN GRANT, Plaintiff, v. WILLIAM KNIPP, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Dec 10, 2013

Citations

2:11-cv-2302 KJM KJN P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 10, 2013)