Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_90-cv-00520/USCOURTS-caed-2_90-cv-00520-674/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

RALPH COLEMAN, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., et al.,

Defendants. 

No. CIV. S-90-520 LKK/DAD (PC) 

ORDER 

On January 21, 2013, the parties filed post-hearing briefs 

on plaintiffs’ motion concerning housing and treatment of 

mentally ill inmates in segregation. (ECF Nos. 4985, 4988.) On 

February 5, 2014, plaintiffs filed a response to defendants’ 

post-hearing brief. (ECF No. 5051.) On February 10, 2014, 

defendants filed objections and a request to strike that brief. 

(ECF No. 5062). On the same day, plaintiffs filed an opposition 

to defendants’ motion (ECF No. 5063), and the next day defendants 

filed a reply (ECF No. 5064). 

The dispute between the parties arises from a discrepancy 

between the court’s oral ruling concerning closing briefs at the 

conclusion of the evidentiary hearing on December 19, 2013 and 

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 5070 Filed 02/20/14 Page 1 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

2 

the minutes issued the same day. Compare Reporter’s Transcript 

(RT) (ECF No. 5020) at 3751:22-3752:6 with ECF No. 4972. Good 

cause appearing, plaintiffs’ response will be considered and 

defendants will be granted fifteen days to file a response to 

plaintiffs’ closing brief.1 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Defendants’ February 10, 2014 request to strike 

plaintiffs’ reply brief (ECF No. 5062) is denied; and 

2. Defendants are granted fifteen days from the date of 

this order in which to file and serve a response to 

plaintiffs’ closing brief on plaintiffs’ motion 

concerning housing and treatment of mentally ill inmates 

in segregation. Thereafter the matter will stand 

submitted. 

DATED: February 19, 2014. 

 

1

 The court must note that this dispute, which generated three additional 

filings by the parties plus an order by the court, could easily have been 

resolved by a joint request for clarification accompanied by a stipulation of 

the parties agreeing to a solution and a proposed order thereon. Going 

forward, the court expects the parties to work together wherever possible to 

decrease, rather than expand, their areas of disagreement. 

Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-SCR Document 5070 Filed 02/20/14 Page 2 of 2