Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Mattox v. Edelman

United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division

March 6, 2015

TODD MATTOX, Plaintiff,
v.
ADAM EDELMAN and ADRIANNE NEFF, Defendant.

Honorable Laurie J. Michelson, Judge

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS TO AMEND COMPLAINT [73, 95], APPOINT COUNSEL [83], AND AMEND/CORRECT IFP APPLICATION [93], AND DEFENDANT HANRESH PANDYA’S MOTION TO EXTEND [99]

ELIZABETH A. STAFFORD, United States Magistrate Judge

Todd Mattox, a pro se plaintiff prisoner, brought this action pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. On January 21, 2015, the Honorable Laurie J. Michelson referred the case to the undersigned to resolve all pretrial matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B).

For the reasons discussed below, the Court ORDERS that:

1. Mattox’s Motion For Leave To File Amended Complaint [73] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART;
2. Mattox’s Motion For Appointment Of Counsel [83] is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;
3. Mattox’s Motion to Amend Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) [93] is DENIED AS MOOT;
4. Mattox’s Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint [95] is DENIED; and
5. Defendant Hanresh Pandya’s Motion to Extend Time in Which To File Responsive Pleadings [99] is GRANTED.

I. BACKGROUND

Mattox’s original complaint against Adam Edelman and Adrianne Neff pertained to his treatment for a heart condition during the period between July 2011 and April 2012. [1]. An order granting Neff’s motion to dismiss was issued in July 2013, and an order granting Edelman’s motion for summary judgment was issued in September 2014. [32, 77].

In the interim, in August and September 2013, Mattox sought to amend his complaint to replead claims against Neff and Edelman and add as defendants Pandya (an employee of the Michigan Department of Corrections (“MDOC”)), and Corizon Health, Inc. [34, 37]. Magistrate Judge Komives denied both motions, but without prejudice as to Pandya and Corizon. [63, 65].

In September 2014, Mattox again moved to amend his complaint to include claims against Pandya, Corizon, Prison Health Services (“PHS”), Dr. Kenneth Jordan, Dr. William Borgerding, and physician assistant (“PA”) Margaret Ouelette from September of 2011 until April of 2014. [73]. Judge Michelson granted Mattox leave to amend his complaint with respect to Pandya and referred to this Court the question of whether the other proposed defendants should be permitted. [77]. On January 9, 2015, before this Court ruled on the other ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.