Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Brewer v. Thompson

United States District Court, D. Utah

July 9, 2018

JORDAN ALAN NEVES BREWER, Plaintiff,
v.
DAVIS COUNTY et al., Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER DIRECTING SERVICE OF PROCESS OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT & DISPOSITIVE MOTION(S)

          Tena Campbell, District Judge

         Plaintiff, Jordan Alan Neves Brewer, filed this pro se prisoner civil-rights suit. See 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 (2018). Plaintiff was allowed to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 id. § 1915.

         On June 3, 2016, the Court ordered service of his first amended complaint. (Doc. Nos. 9 & 13.) Litigation ensued. On April, 28, 2017, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of three defendants (Perry, Wood, and Russell).

         On September 25, 2017, the Court denied the many other pending motions for summary judgment and appointed pro bono counsel for Plaintiff. (Doc. No. 194.) The appointment was limited to helping "Plaintiff in (1) evaluating whether to file a Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint, and, if appropriate, drafting and filing the motion and Second Amended Complaint . . . and (2) obtaining discovery necessary to determine the necessity for and content of a Second Amended Complaint." (Id. at 2.) The Court stated, "[W]hen the purpose of this appointment has been completed, counsel is directed to file a Notice of Fulfillment of Limited Appointment." (Id.)

         Counsel was appointed for Plaintiff and entered appearances on January 9, 2018. (Doc Nos. 197 & 198.) On April 9, 2018, Plaintiff's counsel filed a motion to amend, with the proposed Second Amended Complaint as an exhibit. (Doc. No. 199.) Defendants opposed it. (Doc. No. 200.) Plaintiff replied. (Doc. No. 201.) On May 29, 2018, Plaintiff's counsel filed Notice of Fulfillment of Limited Appointment, (Doc. No. 203), and withdrew, (Doc. No. 204).

         Plaintiff now moves again for appointed counsel, (Doc. No. 205), and Defendants object, (Doc. No. 206). Most recently, on June 15, 2018, Defendants move to stay discovery requested of them by Plaintiff. (Doc. No. 207.)

         The Court first grants Plaintiff's motion to amend his complaint and orders filing of the Second Amended Complaint. (Doc. No. 199-1.)

         Second, based on its review of the Second Amended Complaint, (see Docket Entry # 199-1), the Court concludes that official service of process is warranted. The United States Marshals Service (USMS) is directed to serve a properly issued summons and a copy of Plaintiff's Complaint, along with this Order, upon the following Davis and Weber County defendants:

DAVIS COUNTY


TODD RICHARDSON, DAVIS COUNTY SHERIFF


SCOTT MANFULL, DAVIS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE DEPUTY


WEBER COUNTY


TERRY THOMPSON, WEBER COUNTY SHERIFF


JOSEPH PORTER, WEBER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE (WCSO) SERGEANT


KERI SEKULICH, WCSO LIEUTENANT


JEREMY MILLER, WCSO LIEUTENANT


JORDAN BONYAI, WCSO DEPUTY


PAT COLLINGSWORTH, WCSO MAIL CLERK


         Once served, Defendants shall respond to the summons in one of the following ways:

(A) If Defendants wish to assert the affirmative defense of Plaintiff's failure to exhaust administrative remedies in a grievance process, Defendants must,
(i) file an answer, within twenty days of service;
(ii) within ninety days of filing an answer, prepare and file a Martinez report limited to the exhaustion issue[1];
(iii) within ninety days of filing an answer, file a separate summary-judgment motion, with a supporting memorandum; and


(iv) within ninety days of filing an answer, submit a proposed order for dismissing the case based upon Plaintiff's failure to exhaust, in word processing format to: ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.