United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
Jerry E. Logan, Plaintiff,
Hany A. Emam, et al., Defendants.
A. SARGUS, JR., CHIEF JUDGE
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND ORDER
TERENCE P. KEMP, United States Magistrate Judge
a prisoner civil rights case involving a claim for Eighth
Amendment violations. This matter is now before the Court on
a number of motions filed by plaintiff Jerry E. Logan: Motion
for Preliminary Pretrial Scheduling Order (Doc. 19); Motion
for Leave to Supplement (Doc. 21); Motion to Correct the
Records (Doc. 23); Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 24);
Motion for Release of Radiology Reports (Doc. 28); and Motion
for Default Judgment (Doc. 30). The Court will divide them
into non-dispositive motions and dispositive motions, and,
with one exception, will either deny or recommend denial of
all of them.
Motion for Preliminary Pretrial Scheduling Order
Logan has moved for a scheduling order pursuant to
Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(b). Because the Court issued a Scheduling
Order on August 31, 2016, this motion will be denied as moot.
Motion for Leave to Supplement Exhibit
Logan has moved to supplement the record with a letter from
the Ohio State Dental Board (“OSDB”) relating to
his complaint against Dr. Claire Towning, one of the
defendants in this case. It appears he wishes to add it as a
supplement to the complaint. Defendants have not opposed the
motion. Therefore, it will be granted.
Motion to Correct the Records
providing specific examples or details, Mr. Logan has moved
to challenge the accuracy of some of the medical records that
have been produced in relation to his case, and states that
he was “under duress” when required to sign
certain unidentified documents. The defendants oppose the
motion based on lack of clarity. Mr. Logan's reply is
also quite vague, and appears to refer to certain contents of
the medical records which he disputes. Essentially, it
appears that Mr. Logan's motion seeks the Court to
resolve factual issues about these documents. That is a
potential issue for trial and is therefore not appropriate at
this point in the case. Mr. Logan will have the opportunity
in the course of the litigation to provide evidence and
advance his arguments with respect to any factual disputes.
For this reason, the motion will be denied.
Motion for Release of Radiology Reports
Logan has also moved for “authorization for the release
of radiology reports” from an x-ray taken on January
30, 2017 at Chillicothe Correctional Institution. To the
extent that he seeks the document through discovery, as
provided under Fed.R.Civ.P. 34, Mr. Logan must serve a
written request on the Defendants asking for the document. If
it is not produced, Mr. Logan may file a motion asking the
Court to become involved, but it does not appear that the
matter has progressed to that point. Because his motion is
premature and not supported by any evidence that he has asked
Defendants for the x-ray and that they have refused to
produce it, this motion will be denied.
Motion for ...