White v. Miller
8:11-cv-00144
D.S.C.Apr 4, 2011Background
- Plaintiffs Judy White and Gary White, proceeding pro se, allege mistreatment by multiple Federal Prison staff at FCI Edgefield, SC, where Gary White is incarcerated.
- Plaintiffs seek monetary damages, injunctive relief, and other relief.
- Summons and Complaint have not been served; Gary White has been instructed to pay the filing fee or provide financial documents, with a third opportunity granted.
- Plaintiffs filed Emergency Motions (ECF No. 31) that duplicative of prior requests; the court denied similar motions previously.
- Judge Herlong adopted the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation denying emergency relief; this Report and Recommendation addresses the emergency motion at issue.
- Court notes liberal construction of pro se filings and directs plaintiffs to the notice regarding objections to the Report and Recommendation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether emergency relief should be denied. | White(s) seek urgent relief for mistreatment. | Defendants argue no entitlement to emergency relief given procedural posture. | Emergency relief denied. |
| Whether the court can take judicial notice of prior proceedings. | Proceedings show need for relief. | Court may take notice of its files; no new consideration needed. | Court may take judicial notice of its prior proceedings. |
| Whether service and filing-fee requirements affect the action. | Procedural hurdles should not bar consideration of claims. | Filing fee/payment and service are threshold prerequisites. | Issues not addressed as emergency relief denied; procedural prerequisites unresolved. |
| Whether liberal pro se standards apply to this Recommendation. | Court should liberally construe pro se filings. | Procedural rules still apply to determine relief. | Pro se status acknowledged; standard applied in evaluating emergency relief. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fletcher v. Bryan, 175 F.2d 716 (4th Cir. 1949) (court may take notice of its own files and records; prior proceedings considered)
- Aloe Creme Laboratories, Inc. v. Francine Co., 425 F.2d 1295 (5th Cir. 1970) (district court may rely on its own files; no need to reargue)
- Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2005) (standard for reviewing recommendations; de novo absent objections)