From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Neal v. Campbell

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 19, 2009
No. CIV S-08-0313 GEB KJM P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 19, 2009)

Opinion

No. CIV S-08-0313 GEB KJM P.

November 19, 2009


ORDER


Plaintiff is a California prisoner proceeding pro se with an action for violation of civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 4, 2009, a hearing was held concerning plaintiff's May 15, 2009 motion to compel. Plaintiff appeared telephonically, and Deputy Attorney General James Flynn appeared in the courtroom representing defendants. After reviewing the court's file, considering the arguments of plaintiff and counsel for defendants made at the hearing, and in accordance with the preliminary rulings made by the court at the hearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's May 15, 2009 motion to compel is granted in part and denied in part as follows:

A. Within thirty days, defendant Cherry shall provide verified answers to the following:
i. Interrogatory No. 5, construed as follows: Within the last five years, how many times have you been found guilty in a court proceeding for retaliating against an inmate for his or her exercise of rights arising under the First Amendment? ii. Interrogatory No. 6, construed as follows: Within the last five years, how many times has a complaint filed pursuant to state law, other than a court complaint, alleging your retaliation against an inmate for exercising his or her First Amendment rights been found to be meritorious by a person required to respond the complaint?
B. Within thirty days, defendant Campbell shall provide verified answers to the following:
i. Interrogatory No. 5, construed as follows: Under California law, is a transfer necessarily "adverse" if an inmate is transferred to a prison where there are more restrictive conditions of confinement? ii. Interrogatory No. 8, construed as follows: On October 9, 2005, what evidence was there that plaintiff was involved in "gang" activity, the word "gang" having the meaning identified in Title 15 Cal. Code Regs. § 3000?
C. Plaintiff's motion to compel concerning interrogatory number 7 directed to defendant Cherry is denied without prejudice to plaintiff filing a motion under Rule 56(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure if the information requested is essential to justify opposition to a motion for summary judgment.
D. Defendants' objections to all other requests are sustained.
E. The motion to compel is denied in all other respects.

2. Any motions for summary judgment shall be filed within sixty days. An opposition to a summary judgment motion shall be filed within thirty days of service of the motion and a reply shall be filed within fifteen days of service of the opposition.


Summaries of

Neal v. Campbell

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 19, 2009
No. CIV S-08-0313 GEB KJM P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 19, 2009)
Case details for

Neal v. Campbell

Case Details

Full title:SEAN BAPTISTE NEAL, Plaintiff, vs. ROSEANNE CAMPBELL, et al., Defendant

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

Date published: Nov 19, 2009

Citations

No. CIV S-08-0313 GEB KJM P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 19, 2009)