Buy This Entire Record For
Cody v. McDonald
United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Southern Division
October 11, 2016
WILLIAM CODY, Plaintiff,
ASHLEY MCDONALD, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; TIM MEIROSE, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; DARIN YOUNG, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; HEATHER BOWERS, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; JESSICA STEVENS, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; KAYLA TINKER, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; DR. MARY CARPENTER, MD, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; LINDA MILLER-HUNOFF, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; STEVE BAKER, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; AND JENNIFER WAGNER, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; Defendants.
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
DOCKET NOS. 79 & 85
VERONICA L. DUFFY United States Magistrate Judge.
matter is before the court on plaintiff William Cody's
pro se verified complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. See Docket Nos. 1 & 12. After one Rule
12(b)(6) motion to dismiss and two cross-motions for summary
judgment, only a single claim of Mr. Cody's remains: his
claim in Count 3 of his complaint alleging interference with
mails. See Docket Nos. 58 & 65. Now pending are
two motions to compel defendants to respond to various
discovery requests. See Docket Nos. 79 & 85. Mr.
Cody's case has been referred to this magistrate judge
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) & (B) and the
October 16, 2014, standing order of the Honorable Karen E.
Schreier, district judge.
only remaining claim, Mr. Cody alleges defendants violated
his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the
United States Constitution by misdirecting, seizing, and/or
holding or destroying a medical report sent to Mr. Cody by
Dr. Griess, an outside medical doctor. See Docket
No. 1 at pp. 17-20. Mr. Cody alleges between March 28, 2014,
and May 30, 2014, Dr. Griess sent Mr. Cody the same medical
report three times and each time defendants intercepted that
report and failed to give it to Mr. Cody. Id. Mr.
Cody alleges neither he nor Dr. Griess were given notice of
defendants' confiscation of said mail. Id.
Motion to Compel Docket No. 79
Interrogatory No. 10
Cody served defendants with the following interrogatory:
Who, in the SDSP [South Dakota State Penitentiary] Mailroom
received mail addressed to William or Wm. Cody from Medical
Doctors or medical firms after: March 28, May 30,
November 17, 19, or 26, December 2, 14, 16, 18, 23, 2014;
January 23, March 17, April 14, 28, July 9, August 31, 2015;
or January 23, 2016.
Docket No. 79-1 at p. 3.
responded to Mr. Cody's Interrogatory No. 10 as follows:
Defendants object, as irrelevant and immaterial, to any
request for information regarding “who in the SDSP
Mailroom received mail addressed to William or Wm. Cody from
medical doctors or medical firms” on any dates other
than March 28, 2014, May 30, 2014, November 17, 29, 262014
[sic] and December 16, 2014. A review of the pleadings filed
herein will readily reveal that these are the only dates on
which Plaintiff alleges that he was not allowed to review
reports from an outside provider. There is no mention
whatsoever in the pleadings on file with the Court to the
various other dates now referred to. As for the dates of
March 28, May 30, November 17, 19 or 26 and December 16, 2014
referred to by Plaintiff, the individuals assigned to work in
the SDSP Mailroom include the following:
March 28, 2014 - Sharon Reimann / Lisa Fraser
May 30, 2014 - J. Storevik / Cathy Wynia
November 17, 2014 - S. Reimann / Linda ...