United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Southern Division
TERRY L. THOMPSON, Plaintiff,
JOSH KLIMEK; DIANE ROMKEMA, Manager; and LARSEN, D-H-O Hearing Officer, Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND
GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART VARIOUS OTHER
E. SCHREIER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Terry L. Thompson, is an inmate at the South Dakota State
Penitentiary in Sioux Falls. Plaintiff filed a pro se civil
rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and amended his
complaint. Defendants now move the court to enter a
protective order staying discovery. Thompson also filed
various motions. For the following reasons, defendants'
motion for protective order is granted, and Thompson's
various motions are granted in part and denied in part.
Motions to Appoint Counsel
filed three motions to appoint counsel. Docket 9; Docket 17;
Docket 35. “A pro se litigant has no statutory or
constitutional right to have counsel appointed in a civil
case.” Stevens v. Redwing, 146 F.3d 538, 546
(8th Cir. 1998). In determining whether to appoint counsel to
a pro se litigant, the district court considers the
complexity of the case, the ability of the litigant to
investigate the facts, the existence of conflicting
testimony, and the litigant's ability to present his
claim. Id. At this point, Thompson is able to
present his claim, and his claims are not complex. It is too
early in the litigation to determine the other factors.
Therefore, Thompson's motions to appoint counsel are
Motion to Amend Jury Demand
moves to amend the request for damages from $20, 000 to $500,
000 against each defendant. Docket 11. Defendants have not
objected to this motion and the court finds that it is in the
interest of justice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2)
(“The court should freely give leave [to amend] when
justice so requires”). Thompson's motion to amend
the jury demand is granted.
Motion to Strike Quash Irrelevant Material from
moves to strike from the record evidence that he alleges is
not relevant to his claim and is hearsay. Docket 16. He does
not identify the evidence. Defendants have only answered
Thompson's complaint and responded to his factual
allegations. They have not introduced any evidence.
Therefore, Thompson's motion is denied.
Motion for Discovery
moves the court to order defendants to provide him with
discovery. Docket 18. Thompson seeks his prison disciplinary,
administrative, and medical records. Id. Defendants
have not responded to this request. Because it appears that
this information will be necessary for Thompson to respond to
defendants' motion for summary judgment based on
qualified immunity, the court grants Thompson's motion.
requests “all grievances on all defendants” and
their “disciplinary records.” Id. ¶
3. To the extent Thompson seeks grievances he filed against
defendants and defendants' disciplinary records that
concern Thompson, the motion is granted. To the extent that
Thompson seeks grievances other inmates filed against
defendants or the disciplinary records that do not concern
Thompson, the motion is denied.
Motion to ...