From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McKenna v. Wright

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jun 10, 2002
01 Civ. 6571 (WK) (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 10, 2002)

Opinion

01 Civ. 6571 (WK)

June 10, 2002

Edward McKenna #90-A-2392, Woodbourne Correctional Facility, Woodbourne, NY, Plaintiff (pro se).

John E. Knudsen, Assistant Attorney General, State of New York, Office of the Attorney General, New York, NY, for Defendant.


ORDER


On March 20, 2002, Plaintiff Edward McKenna ("Plaintiff") moved this Court to reconsider its March 4, 2002 denial of his motion for a preliminary injunction. Thereafter, on March 21, 2002, we directed the Defendants to respond to Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration. Since then, the Defendants have not yet submitted the required response.

Accordingly, we hereby direct the Defendants to respond to Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration on or before July 10, 2002. As we indicated in our March 21, 2002 order, the Defendants should, at a minimum, provide us with the following information regarding:

(a) the nature of the esophageal varices from which Plaintiff asserts he is suffering and whether they have been responsible for any internal bleeding from which Plaintiff may be suffering;

(b) how such esophageal varices relate to Plaintiff's cirrhosis and Hepatitis C conditions;

(c) the extent to which such varices can be treated and the extent to which Plaintiff's internal bleeding may be controlled;

(d) how Plaintiff's physicians are in fact treating the bleeding from which Plaintiff asserts he is suffering as a result of these varices, or, if the bleeding or varices are not being treated, the reasons why Plaintiff's physicians are not treating them;

(e) to the extent that Plaintiff's physicians are in fact treating his internal bleeding with medication, how such treatment is being monitored (or, if it is not being monitored, the reasons why such treatment is not being monitored);

(f) how the treatment of these varices or Plaintiff's bleeding complies with or contradicts any recommendation made by Dr. Benedict Maliakkal; and (g) whether Plaintiff's purported emphysema or bronchitis relate either to his cirrhosis or Hepatitis C conditions, and, if they are related, how his emphysema and bronchitis are being treated.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

McKenna v. Wright

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jun 10, 2002
01 Civ. 6571 (WK) (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 10, 2002)
Case details for

McKenna v. Wright

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD MCKENNA, Plaintiff, v. LESTER K. WRIGHT, Associate…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Jun 10, 2002

Citations

01 Civ. 6571 (WK) (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 10, 2002)

Citing Cases

McKenna v. Wright

See id. at *1-*2. After further prompting, see McKenna v. Wright (S.D.N.Y. June 10, 2002) No. 01 Civ. 6571…