uw

Minys'Ocder Form (06197) ¢
United States District Court, Northern District of Dlinois
Name of Assigned Judge Sitting Judge if Other
or Magistrate Judge James B. Moran than Assigned Judge
CASE NUMBER 01 C 7865 DATE 4/1/2003
CASE Ruby Reed etc. Vs. City of Chicago et al.
TITLE
[In the following box (a) indicate the party filing the motion, e.g., plaintiff, defendant, 3rd party plaintiff, and (b) state briefly the nature
MOTION: of the motion being presented. }
Memorandum Opinion and Order

DOCKET ENTRY:

() im Filed motion of [ use listing in “Motion” box above.]

(2) oO Brief in support of motion due

(3) Oo Answer brief to motion due. . Reply to answer brief due.

(4) oO Ruling/Hearing on set for at

(5) oO Status hearing[held/continued to] [set for/re-set for] on set for at

(6) Oo Pretrial conference[held/continued to] [set for/re-set for] on set for at :

(7) Qo Trial[set for/re-set for] on at

(8) im] [Bench/Jury trial] [Hearing] held/continued to at

(9) ao This case is dismissed [with/without] prejudice and without costs[by/agreement/pursuant to]

OOFRCP4(m) Local Rule 41.1 OFRCP41(a)\(1) OFRCP41(a)(2).

(10) Ml [Other docket entry] Enter Memorandum Opinion and Order. We grant the Rule 56(f) motion and
leave until the next status, May 28, 2003, the issue of what additional discovery is then appropriate (after
discovery in the interim), and how long it should take.

dl) [For further detail see order attached to the original minute order.]

No notices required, advised in open court.

No notices required.

umber of notices

Notices mailed by judge’s staff.
Notified counsel by telephone.
Docketing to mail notices.

Mail AO 450 form.

Copy to judge/magistrate judge.

date muited notion
courtroom

WAH deputy’s
initials

A)
Date/time received i
central Clerk's Office mailing deputy initials



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

RUBY REED, Special Administrator of the
Estate of J. C. REED, Deceased,

vs. No. 01 C 7865

)

)

)
Plaintiff, )

)

)

)
CITY OF CHICAGO, a municipal corporation, )
TIMOTHY GOULD, BRUCE YOUNG, BRIAN )
PEMBERTON, SUSAN MADISON,
EDWARDS MEDICAL SUPPLY, INC.,
CYPRESS MEDICAL PRODUCTS, LTD.,
CYPRESS MEDICAL PRODUCTS, INC. and
MEDLINE INDUSTRIES, INC.,

ae
we a

wewevevevv

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

J. C, Reed hanged himself with a yellow isolation gown on November 12, 2000, while
in a police lockup. Determining who manufactured and who sold that gown to the City has
indeed proved to be elusive. One of the defendants, Medline Industries, Inc. (Medline), is one
of the possible sellers. Its gown manufacturer, Thai Hospital Products, Ltd., has also been
named as a defendant but, at last report, that company has not yet appeared.

Medline now moves for summary judgment. Plaintiff seeks, by a Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 56(f) motion, for time to respond, during which it can pursue discovery. Medline
has no objection to some discovery, although it believes any such discovery should be limited
to discovery relating to it and should be completed within 60 days. It does not want to become
involved in discovery relating to other defendants.

We grant the Rule 56(f) motion and leave until the next status, May 28, 2003, the issu



ee

No. 01 C 7865 Page 2

of what additional discovery is then appropriate (after discovery in the interim), and how long
it should take. We are mindful of Medline’s concerns about becoming involved in wide-
ranging discovery before the question of who manufactured and who sold the gown has been
determined. We think, though, that even though that question has priority, plaintiff should
be able to pursue it by discovery from Medline, its Thai manufacturer, and other possible
sellers and manufacturers. Since plaintiff is obviously interested in coming up with a correct
answer, we are not at all sure Medline has a compelling interest in being involved in discovery
relating to other possible candidates, If any is a possibility, plaintiff has demonstrated a
willingness to pursue it. It may be that the disclosure of a sample of the gown sold by Medline
~ either by Medline or the Thai manufacturer — will permit a conclusive comparison, but that

we leave to another day.

JAMES B. MORAN
Sentor Judge, U. S. District Court

.
Ord {__, 2003.