REAVES v. WEXFORD MEDICAL SERVICES

S.D. Indiana

REAVES v. WEXFORD MEDICAL SERVICES

DecidedDecember 9, 2019

Docket1:19-cv-00151

StatusUnknown

This text of REAVES v. WEXFORD MEDICAL SERVICES (REAVES v. WEXFORD MEDICAL SERVICES) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Indiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

REAVES v. WEXFORD MEDICAL SERVICES, (S.D. Ind. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

KEVIN REAVES, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:19-cv-00151-JPH-DLP ) WEXFORD MEDICAL SERVICES, et al. ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER Plaintiff Kevin Reaves filed an affidavit of special circumstances which was docketed as a motion for a protective order. He contends that the defendants in this case and a number of others have attempted to stop the progression of his legal actions, mainly by interfering with his mail. He asks for a transfer to a different facility. To the extent that Mr. Reaves is requesting an injunction ordering his transfer to a different facility, “[a] preliminary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy, one that should not be granted unless the movant, by a clear showing, carries the burden of persuasion.” River of Life Kingdom Ministries v. Village of Hazel Crest, 585 F.3d 364, 369 (7th Cir. 2009) (quoting Mazurek v. Armstrong, 520 U.S. 968, 972 (1997) (emphasis in original)). “To obtain such relief, the moving party must first demonstrate that it has a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits, lacks an adequate remedy at law, and will suffer irreparable harm.” Id. (citing Girl Scouts of Manitou Council, Inc.v. Girl Scouts of U.S. Inc., 549 F.3d 1079, 1086 (7th Cir. 2008)). Mr. Reaves’s motion is not based on sufficient factual allegations to show that he has a reasonable likelihood of success on the merit of his request for transfer. In addition, he has an adequate remedy at law for these claims because he can file a lawsuit on this issue. Finally, he has not shown that he will suffer irreparable harm. For these reasons, motion, dkt. [54], must be DENIED. SO ORDERED. Date: 12/9/2019

James Patrick Hanlon Distribution: United States District Judge Southern District of Indiana KEVIN REAVES 161700 PLAINFIELD - CF PLAINFIELD CORRECTIONAL FACILITY Electronic Service Participant — Court Only All Electronically Registered Counsel

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

KEVIN REAVES, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:19-cv-00151-JPH-DLP ) WEXFORD MEDICAL SERVICES, et al. ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER Plaintiff Kevin Reaves filed an affidavit of special circumstances which was docketed as a motion for a protective order. He contends that the defendants in this case and a number of others have attempted to stop the progression of his legal actions, mainly by interfering with his mail. He asks for a transfer to a different facility. To the extent that Mr. Reaves is requesting an injunction ordering his transfer to a different facility, “[a] preliminary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy, one that should not be granted unless the movant, by a clear showing, carries the burden of persuasion.” River of Life Kingdom Ministries v. Village of Hazel Crest, 585 F.3d 364, 369 (7th Cir. 2009) (quoting Mazurek v. Armstrong, 520 U.S. 968, 972 (1997) (emphasis in original)). “To obtain such relief, the moving party must first demonstrate that it has a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits, lacks an adequate remedy at law, and will suffer irreparable harm.” Id. (citing Girl Scouts of Manitou Council, Inc.v. Girl Scouts of U.S. Inc., 549 F.3d 1079, 1086 (7th Cir. 2008)). Mr. Reaves’s motion is not based on sufficient factual allegations to show that he has a reasonable likelihood of success on the merit of his request for transfer. In addition, he has an adequate remedy at law for these claims because he can file a lawsuit on this issue. Finally, he has not shown that he will suffer irreparable harm. For these reasons, motion, dkt. [54], must be DENIED. SO ORDERED. Date: 12/9/2019

James Patrick Hanlon Distribution: United States District Judge Southern District of Indiana KEVIN REAVES 161700 PLAINFIELD - CF PLAINFIELD CORRECTIONAL FACILITY Electronic Service Participant — Court Only All Electronically Registered Counsel

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

REAVES v. WEXFORD MEDICAL SERVICES, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reaves-v-wexford-medical-services-insd-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack