United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
EDWARD C. COOK, JASON GRIDER, KENNETH LAINHART, ROBERT PEACHER, Plaintiffs,
CHARLES WILEY Sergeant, JASON GRIFFITH Sergeant, MICHAEL SPURGIN Captain, Defendants.
ENTRY ON STATUS CONFERENCE OF OCTOBER 10,
Baker United States Magistrate Judge
October 10, 2019, the Court conducted a status conference in
this action. Defendants appeared by counsel. Plaintiffs Cook,
Grider, and Peacher participated pro se by video and
Plaintiff Lainhart participated pro se by telephone.
result of the conference, the Court issues the following
Plaintiffs' motion to compel, dkt. , is
granted to the extent that Defendants must
produce the following:
a. The names and job titles of staff members who were on the
unit on September 4, 2018;
b. A video from the chow hall on September 8, 2019, in which
Defendant Griffin allegedly talked to Peacher about the
September 4, 2018, incident; and
c. Defendant Michael Spurgin's responses to
Plaintiffs' requests for admission (if not already
respect to redacted documents discussed during the
conference, Defendants reported that they have sent a
privilege log to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs shall review the
privilege log and if they have additional objections, they
shall attempt to resolve those with defense counsel before
seeking any intervention from the Court.
Plaintiffs' motion for order to obtain affidavits, dkt.
, is granted to the extent that
Defendants represented that there is no policy preventing
Indiana Department of Correction (IDOC) staff from providing
statements or declarations to inmates for litigation
purposes. The policy reportedly requires staff to notify the
Warden if they do give statements or declarations to inmates.
As will be discussed further in this Entry, if counsel is
recruited, counsel will assist Plaintiffs in obtaining
declarations or conducting depositions, if the case does not
settle before such discovery is needed.
Plaintiffs' motion for assistance with obtaining a court
reporter, dkt. , is denied because the
Court lacks the authority to do so.
Plaintiffs' motion to grant motion to compel, dkt. ,
is granted to the extent consistent with the
ruling in paragraph 1 of this Entry.
Plaintiffs' motion for extension of time for discovery,
dkt. , and Defendants' motion to extend discovery
deadline, dkt. , are granted subject to
the pretrial schedule being reset after a settlement
conference that will be set by separate order. Discovery may
proceed in the meantime.
Plaintiffs' motion for leave to take depositions by
interrogatories, dkt. , is denied as
moot because if depositions are needed after the
settlement conference, recruited counsel will assist in that
Plaintiffs' motion to appear at depositions, dkt. ,
is granted. They have the right to be
present if depositions are taken. If Plaintiffs have counsel,
Plaintiffs' appearance at any deposition shall be by
counsel. If Plaintiffs do not have counsel, Plaintiffs shall
be permitted to appear telephonically. Given the logistics of
the four Plaintiffs being incarcerated at two ...