Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/cod;;1:17-cv-01654_de60> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 7 of
7
with 100 items per page.
- cod;;1:17-cv-01654_de60 RegisterActionDate "2018-08-16" @default.
- cod;;1:17-cv-01654_de60 RegisterActionDescriptionText "ORDER denying 59 Motion for Hearing/Conference: Having carefully reviewed the transcript of the April 23, 2018 hearing, the Court observes as follows. The parties resolved Ms. Saunders-Velez's request for a preliminary injunction 38 via an agreement by which CDOC would provide her with four business days' notice of a change in her housing location. The Court understands that the purpose of the notice requirement was to permit Ms. Saunders-Velez to, if necessary, renew her request for a preliminary injunction preventing certain reassignments. The Court assumes that Ms. Saunders-Velez's instant filing, requesting "a hearing," is made pursant to the prior preliminary injunction motion.The Court also notes that the injury Ms. Saunders-Velez identified in her preliminary injunction motion and the injury she asserts now are distinct. In the preliminary injunction motion, she expressed concern that "there are currently four individuals" ("Wet-o," "Angelo," "G-String," and "Wing") "who are housed in the punishment pod that have threatened her with sexual assault and/or asked her for sexual favors." Her current motion expresses concern that she will be placed in the punishment pod with an individual named Juan Candelaria, whom Ms. Saunders-Velez believes may "assault" her -- Ms. Saunders-Velez is not clear whether she anticipates a sexual assault or a simple physical assault -- because she and Mr. Candelaria are in the midst of a dispute over a television set. Although the Court is aware of Ms. Saunders-Velez's history of victimization and is sympathetic to her concerns that she may be assaulted again in the future, neither the agreement by which Ms. Saunders-Velez resolved the preliminary injunction motion nor this lawsuit as a whole are free-form opportunities to challenge any housing decision that CDOC may make involving her. The Court is not persuaded that, on the record before it, Ms. Saunders-Velez's concerns about Mr. Candelaria are sufficiently connected to the agreement that she reached with CDOC concerning her fears of sexual assault from the four other named inmates, such that a hearing under the auspices of the pending preliminary injunction motion is appropriate.Even if the Court were to construe Ms. Saunders-Velez's current filing as a new motion for preliminary injunction, specifically directed at CDOC's decision to house her with Mr. Candelaria, the Court would deny it in its current form. Ms. Saunders-Velez's ability to obtain preliminary injunctive relief is, by definition, bounded by the underlying claims she asserts in this action. Those claims, as set forth in the Amended Complaint 51 , relate to CDOC's failure to provide her with appropriate protection because of her transgender status. As presented here, Ms. Saunders-Velez's current dispute with Mr. Candelaria relates to the issue of the televsion set, not her gender identity. In short, then, Ms. Saunders-Velez's concern that she may be assaulted by Mr. Canderlaria because of a dispute over physical property does not fall within the claims she asserts in this matter, and is thus not an appropriate subject for preliminary injunctive relief. Accordingly, her request for a hearing is denied. By Chief Judge Marcia S. Krieger on 8/16/18. Text Only Entry (msklc2, ) (Entered: 08/16/2018)" @default.
- cod;;1:17-cv-01654_de60 AdministrativeID "61" @default.
- cod;;1:17-cv-01654_de60 OntologyLabel order @default.
- cod;;1:17-cv-01654_de60 hasReferenceToOtherEntry cod;;1:17-cv-01654_de37 @default.
- cod;;1:17-cv-01654_de60 hasReferenceToOtherEntry cod;;1:17-cv-01654_de50 @default.
- cod;;1:17-cv-01654_de60 hasReferenceToOtherEntry cod;;1:17-cv-01654_de58 @default.