Opinion
Case No. 2:04-CV-844 DAK.
August 18, 2005
ORDER
Plaintiff, Paul Payne, an inmate at Utah State Prison, filed a pro se civil rights complaint. See 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 (2005). Plaintiff has since filed several motions: a second one for appointed counsel, two for discovery, and one each for default judgment, preliminary injunction, an order to allow him greater legal access, and decisions on his motions and complaint.
The Court first addresses Plaintiff's second motion for appointed counsel. For the same reasons cited in the Court's previous order, the Court once again denies counsel. As the Court noted before: If, after further review, it appears counsel may be needed or of specific help, the Court will ask an attorney to appear pro bono on Plaintiff's behalf. No further motions for appointed counsel are necessary to trigger this evaluation.
Second, the Court denies Plaintiff's discovery motions. These are premature as the Court has yet to screen Plaintiff's complaint. See 28 id. § 1915A. Should the complaint be favorably screened, the Court will direct discovery as it deems necessary.
Third, Plaintiff moves for default judgment, asserting defendants have not responded to his complaint in the time allowed by the rules of civil procedure. The Court reminds Plaintiff that he asked the Court to order service of process under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. That section declares, "The officers of the court shall issue and serve all process . . . in such cases." Id. § 1915(d). Plaintiff is not authorized to serve process here. The Court will determine whether to order service after screening the complaint. Defendants have no responsibility to answer Plaintiff's complaint until it is officially served upon them by the United States Marshal. The Court thus denies Plaintiff's motion for default judgment.
Fourth, the Court evaluates Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction. This motion is premature in light of the fact that Defendants have yet to be served. Further, Plaintiff appears to be trying to expedite some of the relief he seeks in his complaint. And, Plaintiff has not specified adequate facts showing each of the four elements necessary to obtain a preliminary injunctive order:
"(1) a substantial likelihood of prevailing on the merits; (2) irreparable harm in the absence of the injunction; (3) proof that the threatened harm outweighs any damage the injunction may cause to the party opposing it; and (4) that the injunction, if issued, will not be adverse to the public interest."Brown v. Callahan, 979 F. Supp. 1357, 1361 (D. Kan. 1997) (quoting Kan. Health Care Ass'n v. Kan. Dep't of Soc. and Rehab. Servs., 31 F.3d 1536, 1542 (10th Cir. 1994)).
Preliminary injunctive relief is an extraordinary and drastic remedy to be granted only when the right to relief is "clear and unequivocal." SCFC ILC, Inc. v. VISA USA, Inc., 936 F.2d 1096, 1098 (10th Cir. 1991). The Court has carefully reviewed Plaintiff's pleadings and motion for injunctive relief and concludes Plaintiff's claims do not rise to such an elevated level that an emergency injunction is warranted. In sum, Plaintiff has not met the heightened pleading standard required in moving for an emergency injunction. Therefore, this motion is denied.
Fifth, the Court decides Plaintiff's motion for greater legal access to help him "properly prosecute this case." The Court recognizes that indigent prison inmates have a constitutional right to adequate and meaningful legal access, including the provision by the correctional facility of a law library or some kind of legal resources. See, e.g., Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 821-22, 97 S. Ct. 1491, 1494-95 (1977); Penrod v. Zavaras, 94 F.3d 1399, 1403 (10th Cir. 1996); Carper v. Deland, 54 F.3d 613, 616 (10th Cir. 1995). However, among other things, "an inmate's right of access does not require the state to supply legal assistance beyond the preparation of initial pleadings." Carper, 54 F.3d at 617. And, Plaintiff does not allege interference with his ability to file initial pleadings in this case. Indeed, Plaintiff's copious filings in this Court belie his assertion that his efforts to present his case here are somehow being thwarted. The Court therefore denies Plaintiff's "Motion to Compel."
Finally, Plaintiff asks for decisions on his complaint and motions. Through this and past orders, all Plaintiff's motions in this case thus far have been decided. And, Plaintiff's complaint will be screened at the Court's earliest convenience. The Court thus denies Plaintiff's "Motion to Submit for Decision."
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
(1) Plaintiff's motion for appointed counsel is denied. ( See File Entry # 8.) However, if, after the case is further reviewed, it appears that counsel may be needed or of specific help, the Court will ask an attorney to appear pro bono on Plaintiff's behalf.
(2) Plaintiff's motions for discovery are denied. ( See File Entry #s 25 26.)
(3) Plaintiff's motion for default judgment is denied. ( See File Entry # 15.)
(4) Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief is denied. ( See File Entry # 16.)
(5) Plaintiff's "Motion to Compel" is denied. ( See File Entry # 21.)
(6) Plaintiff's "Motion to Submit for Decision" is denied. ( See File Entry # 23.)