Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Garrett v. Macomber, 2:16-cv-1336 KJM AC P. (2020)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20200320665 Visitors: 19
Filed: Mar. 19, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 19, 2020
Summary: ORDER ALLISON CLAIRE , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983, has filed a motion to join a new defendant. ECF No. 125. The motion appears to seek leave to amend the complaint to add the California Men's Colony, or possibly the warden of that prison, as a new defendant based on several rules violations that took place in 2019. Id. The motion will be denied. This action deals with alleged due process and equ
More

ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, has filed a motion to join a new defendant. ECF No. 125. The motion appears to seek leave to amend the complaint to add the California Men's Colony, or possibly the warden of that prison, as a new defendant based on several rules violations that took place in 2019. Id. The motion will be denied. This action deals with alleged due process and equal protection violations arising out of a disciplinary proceeding that took place at California State Prison, Sacramento at the end of 2015. ECF No. 1. Although plaintiff has failed to provide a copy of his proposed amended complaint, it appears that the claims he seeks to bring against the new defendant arise out of incidents at a different prison over three years later. The new claims do not involve the same defendants or arise out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences, making joinder improper. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 18(a) (joinder of claims); Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2) (joinder of defendants). If plaintiff wishes to pursue claims related to incidents that occurred when he was housed at the California Men's Colony, which is located in San Luis Obispo County, he may do so in a separate lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to add a new defendant, ECF No. 125, is denied.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer