Free Order on Motion to Amend/Correct - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

_ _____ ____L_ _i
Case 3:03-cv—OO158-HBF Document 48 Filed O9/20/2004 Page1 of 4 -
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT §?Q§ ¢j*·i ·-·~
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT mh Q;-P V}? if
‘ #- H¤ Eb
JAMES MCKINNON I i' Cui
PRISONER
V. CASE NO. 3:O3CVl58 (HBF)
LINDA MESSENGER, et al. l |
I
RULING ON PENDING MOTIONS g
Pending before the court are two motions for leave to amend, 3
one motion for discovery, one motion for settlement conference I
and two motions to convert the defendants’ motion for summary
judgment to a motion to dismiss filed by the plaintiff. For the
reasons set forth below, the motions are denied.
I. Motion for Settlement Conference doc. § 29]
The plaintiff asks the court to schedule a settlement I
conference in this case. In view of the fact that the defendants I
have moved for summary judgment, the court concludes that a X
settlement conference would not be beneficial at this time.
The motion is denied without prejudice to renewal after the court l
rules on the defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
II. Motion for Discovery doc. & 24| i
The plaintiff seeks an order directing the defendants to i
produce documents described in his motion. The court construes !
the motion as a motion to compel. It does not appear that the }
plaintiff has served this request for production of documents on ?

II`IIII`IIII`I”I"I"‘— -
_%¥`h—*_I—%F¥WRWF#7%F`1%WF77%I%1%WFfv%F¥QRWF#v%F¥WRWFlv%*¥1`??*$%f""ITI?*?*Tit


. _»__ ___ ....~.~ ii.__.....-............._.........l...;....;. —-.-.;..1L.»i
Case 3:03-cv—OO158-HBF Document 48 Filed O9/20/2004 Page20f4
the defendants prior to filing of this motion. Thus, the motion
is premature.
In addition, a party may seek the assistance of the court
only after he has complied with the provisions of Rule j
37(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule j
37(a)2 of the Local Civil Rules of the United States District
Court for the District of Connecticut. Under both rules, a
motion to compel must include a certification that the plaintiff l
has made an attempt to confer with opposing counsel in a good
faith effort to resolve the discovery dispute without the
intervention of the court.
The plaintiff has failed to file a certification that he has U ‘
made a good faith effort to resolve this discovery dispute {
without the intervention of the court. Because the plaintiff has ` K
not complied with the provisions of Local Rule 37(a)2, the motion _
to compel is denied without prejudice as premature. l
III. Motions to Convert Motion for Summary Judgment to Motion to j
Motion to Dismiss docs. jj 38, 41 ‘
The plaintiff asks the court to convert the defendants’ j
motion for summary judgment to a motion to dismiss. The
plaintiff cites no authority to convert a motion for summary
judgment to a motion to dismiss. The cases that he cites in his
motions discuss converting a motion to dismiss to a motion for
summary judgment based on a court's consideration of documents I
that were not attached to or referenced in the complaint. Here,
2 W

,iiim_________i_________“___.i__.rn_...,...._...i.ri“ui........i..i...“......l...“in
Case 3:03-cv—OO158-HBF Document 48 Filed O9/20/2004 Page 3 of 4
the defendants have moved for summary judgment and rely on -
multiple affidavits and exhibits to support their motion. Thus,
the motion is properly filed as a motion for summary judgment.
The motions to convert the defendants' motion for summary .
judgment to a motion to dismiss are denied.
IV. Motions to Amend docs. §§ 21, 28
The plaintiff seeks to file a second amended complaint to i
add an Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) claim. Because
the plaintiff has already filed one amended complaint and the
defendants have filed an answer to the amended complaint, he must A
seek leave to file a second amended complaint. See Rule l5(a), `
Fed. R. Civ. P. Both motions to amend are identical except that l
the proposed amended complaint submitted with the second motion
includes medical records as attachments. The proposed amended
complaints include paragraphs describing the ADA and case law
interpreting the ADA, but no facts relating to an ADA claim.
Even if the plaintiff had identified facts supporting an ADA
claim, he concedes that he has not exhausted his ADA claim.1 i
Justice does not require the court to grant the plaintiff leave l
1 Although the plaintiff claims that he need not exhaust any
ADA claims, the State of Connecticut Department of Correction
Administrative Directives provide otherwise. See Department of _
Correction Administrative Directive 9.6, section 6(A)(5) '
(“matter[s] relating to access to privileges, programs and
services, conditions of care or supervision and living unit
conditions within the authority of the Department of Correction, to I
include rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, except as I
noted herein" are grievable). '

____ __M] @ga_______m______________mM__r.m......_..*._nm“ir_.,......*..“...__.._..u.JAT
Case 3:03-cv—OO158-HBF Document 48 Filed O9/20/2004 Page40f4
to file a second amended complaint at this stage of the
litigation. The motions are denied.
ggnglusion
The Motions for Leave to Amend [docs. ## 2l, 28] are DENIED.
The Motions to Convert Motion for Summary Judgment to Motion to
Motion to Dismiss [docs. ## 38, 41] are DENIED. The Motion to
Compel [doc. # 24] is DENIED without prejudice as premature. I
The Motion for Settlement Conference [doc. # 29] is DENIED
without prejudice after the court rules on the defendants’ motion
for summary judgment.
SO ORDERED in Hartford, Connecticut, this /7 of
2004. j . 1 , i
E l
___ · J . V "—··—-———
Hol y B. F' »mmons _
United agistrate Judge
l
l
l
Q
l