Opinion
22-cv-641-jdp
05-03-2023
GLEN R. JEFFERY, JR., Plaintiff, v. KYLE ZENK, MICHEAL GLASS, CAPT. SCHULTZ, and SGT. PRICE, Defendants.
ORDER
JAMES D. PETERSON, DISTRICT JUDGE
Pro se plaintiff Glen R. Jeffery, Jr. filed an “omnibus” motion asking for several things, which I denied in part. Dkt. 19 and Dkt. 20. I have yet to rule on Jeffery's allegation that defendants Glass and Zenk, along with other prison officials, put him in isolation to stop him from litigating this case after the court scheduled a telephonic pretrial conference for April 4, 2023. I ordered defendants to respond to this allegation and explain why Jeffery was put in isolation and prohibited from having phone calls at this time.
Defendants state that “Jeffery was in observation status for making threats of self-harm and attempting to harm staff” on April 4, 2023. See Dkt. 21 at 1. Defendants further state that, “[w]hen an individual in clinical observation has a telephonic hearing, the staff will consider whether the individual may post a risk of harm to himself or staff if he is allowed to leave his observation cell and go to a telephone for the hearing.” Id. at 2. Defendants add that staff asked the court to reschedule the telephonic pretrial conference because of Jeffery's “recent self-harm behavior/threats and assaultive behavior toward staff.” See id. at 3-4. Defendants support their response with the declaration of Kelsey Stange (the Psychologist Supervisor in the Psychological Services Unit at Columbia Correctional Institution), observation records, incident reports, and a conduct report. See Dkt. 22 and Dkt. 23. I have reviewed these records and they support defendants' contentions.
Defendants' response and supporting materials substantially refute Jeffery's contention that he was put in isolation to stop him from litigating this case. The telephonic pretrial conference has been rescheduled for May 11, 2023, and defendants state that Jeffery “[i]deally” will not be on observation status at that time. Dkt. 21 at 5. Jeffrey's observation status has caused a minor delay, but it does not significantly prevent Jeffrey from litigating the case. Jeffrey has shown no basis for granting an injunction or moving up the scheduling conference.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff Glen R. Jeffery's omnibus motion, Dkt. 19, is DENIED.
2. The clerk of court is directed to send plaintiff a copy of this order.