Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-2_20-cv-00099/USCOURTS-ared-2_20-cv-00099-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

DELTA DIVISION 

EDWARD D. SCHULER 

ADC #140938 

v. No. 2:20-cv-97-DPM-JTR 

ASA HUTCHINSON, Governor, 

State of Arkansas, et al. 

DONNIE B. JAMES 

ADC #089050 

v. No. 2:20-cv-98-DPM-JTR 

ASA HUTCHINSON, Governor, 

State of Arkansas, et al. 

JOSHUA CURL 

ADC #168960 

v. No. 2:20-cv-99-DPM-JTR 

ASA HUTCHINSON, Governor, 

State of Arkansas, et al. 

PLAINTIFF 

DEFENDANTS 

PLAINTIFF 

DEFENDANTS 

PLAINTIFF 

DEFENDANTS 

Case 2:20-cv-00099-DPM Document 8 Filed 05/22/20 Page 1 of 6
MICHAEL McDOWELL 

ADC #148366 

v. No. 2:20-cv-100-DPM-JTR 

ASA HUTCHINSON, Governor, 

State of Arkansas, et al. 

JOHN J. SMITH 

ADC #154230 

v. No. 2:20-cv-101-DPM-JTR 

ASA HUTCHINSON, Governor, 

State of Arkansas, et al. 

ROBERT DRAFT 

ADC #160040 

v. No. 2:20-cv-102-DPM-JTR 

ASA HUTCHINSON, Governor, 

State of Arkansas, et al. 

-2-

PLAINTIFF 

DEFENDANTS 

PLAINTIFF 

DEFENDANTS 

PLAINTIFF 

DEFENDANTS 

Case 2:20-cv-00099-DPM Document 8 Filed 05/22/20 Page 2 of 6
T AURIN JOHNSON 

ADC #102958 PLAINTIFF 

v. No. 2:20-cv-103-DPM-JTR 

ASA HUTCHINSON, Governor, 

State of Arkansas, et al. 

ORDER 

DEFENDANTS 

1. Schuler, James, Curl, McDowell, Smith, Draft, and Johnson are 

inmates in the East Arkansas Regional Unit of the Arkansas 

Department of Correction. They filed a combined complaint on 

13 May 2020 alleging that they' re at high risk of contracting COVID-19 

in prison and that, because of each inmate's underlying health issues, 

they' re at high risk of serious illness or death if they contract the virus. 

Pursuant to this Court's internal operating procedures, the Clerk 

docketed the complaint as a separate lawsuit by each inmate. 

Magistrate Judge Ray has addressed in forma pauperis status, screening, 

and service in each case. The Court thanks him for his quick and 

careful attention to those matters. In the interest of judicial economy, 

the Court withdraws the reference in each case. Proceeding in this 

fashion will allow the Court to consider the motions for preliminary 

injunctive relief, and other threshold matters, without the need for 

recommendations and objections. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(A)-(C). 

-3-

Case 2:20-cv-00099-DPM Document 8 Filed 05/22/20 Page 3 of 6
2. On its own motion, the Court consolidates these cases. They 

involve, at this preliminary stage, common questions of law and fact. 

FED. R. Crv. P. 42(a)(2). Schuler v. Hutchinson, et al., E.D. Ark. Case No. 

2:20-cv-97-DPM, will be the lead case. The Court directs the parties to 

file papers only in the Schuler case until further order. The Court also 

directs the Clerk to terminate the pending motions in the other cases. 

That administrative step is without prejudice to the Court addressing 

the merits across the board in the consolidated case. 

3. The Plaintiffs are inmates who say they' re facing severe illness 

if they contract COVID-19. They therefore request a temporary 

restraining order requiring the Department to implement several social 

distancing and sanitation measures. Doc. 4 at 6-7. They also request 

a preliminary injunction requiring their immediate release, plus the 

immediate release of all other high-risk inmates not serving a life 

sentence. Doc. 4 at 7-8. 

The Court can grant a TRO only if it's clear the moving party will 

suffer immediate and irreparable harm if relief isn't granted before the 

opposing party has an opportunity to be heard. FED. R. Crv. P. 65(b). 

By contrast, a preliminary injunction may issue only after the opposing 

party receives notice and an opportunity to be heard. FED. R. Crv. P. 

65(a); Granny Goose Foods, Inc. v. Brotherhood of Teamsters and Auto 

Truck Drivers Local No. 70 of Alameda County, 415 U.S. 423,431 n.7 (1974). 

-4-

Case 2:20-cv-00099-DPM Document 8 Filed 05/22/20 Page 4 of 6
Context is always important. And "in the prison context, a request for 

injunctive relief must always be viewed with great caution because 

judicial restraint is especially called for in dealing with the complex and 

intractable problems of prison administration." Goff v. Harper, 60 F.3d 

518, 520 (8th Cir. 1995) (quotation omitted). 

The inmates' motion for a TRO is denied. They admit that 

currently there are no confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the East 

Arkansas Regional Unit. The threat COVID-19 poses to the inmates' 

health and safety is, therefore, not so immediate that relief must be 

granted before a response or hearing. Nonetheless, these issues are 

pressing. The Court the ref ore directs the Defendants to file an 

expedited answer or Rule 12(b) motion by 1 June 2020. They must also 

file an expedited response to the motion for preliminary injunctive 

relief by that date. Doc. 3-5. Further, the Court construes that motion 

as also seeking the relief requested by way of a TRO. Doc. 4 at 6-8. 

The Defendants should file comprehensive responding papers 

addressing all these issues. 

* * * 

Reference withdrawn. Cases consolidated. Motion for 

temporary restraining order, Doc. 3, denied. Expedited answer or 

Rule 12(b) motion and expedited response to motion for preliminary 

injunction, Doc. 3-5, due by 1 June 2020. If the Court needs to hold a 

-5-

Case 2:20-cv-00099-DPM Document 8 Filed 05/22/20 Page 5 of 6
hearing, it will do so at 1:00 p.m. on Thursday, 4 June 2020 in courtroom 

1A of the Richard Sheppard Arnold United States Courthouse. 

So Ordered. 

(/ D .P. Marshall Jr. 

United States District Judge 

-6-

Case 2:20-cv-00099-DPM Document 8 Filed 05/22/20 Page 6 of 6