United States District Court, D. Maine
ON MOTION FOR JUDICIAL INTERVENTION AND FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
AND ON MOTION TO ACCEPT PARTIAL RESPONSES AND TO ALLOW THE
RECORD TO REMAIN OPEN, AND MOTION FOR COURT TO OBTAIN BATE
STAMPED MATERIALS FROM DEFENDANTS THAT PLAINTIFF CITED IN
HIS RESPONSES TO DISPOSITIVE PLEADINGS
A. WOODCOCK, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Court denies a Plaintiff's demand that he be allowed to
respond fully to long-pending dispositive motions only when
the Bureau of Prisons releases certain evidence to him that
depicts what happened to him. The Plaintiff is a competent
witness of his own lived experience and it is not necessary
to obtain documentation from other sources in order to
respond to factual allegations about his own experience.
procedural history of these motions began simply enough, but
quickly became complicated due to James Stile's
unorthodox filings. To begin, on July 17, 2018, James Stile
filed identical motions for judicial intervention in his
lawsuits against Somerset and Cumberland Counties. Mot.
for Judicial Intervention (ECF No. 242) (No.
2:14-cv-00406-JAW); (ECF No. 568) (No. 1:13-cv-00248-JAW)
(Pl.'s Mot.). On August 1, 2018, the Cumberland
County Defendants filed their response. Obj. to Pl.'s
Mot. for Judicial Intervention (Document No. 242) (ECF
No. 244) (Cumberland Resp.).
30, 2018, only in the Somerset County case, Mr. Stile filed a
motion to accept partial response and to allow the record to
remain open. Mot. to Accept Partial Resp. to Defs.'
Mot. for Summ. J. and Allow Record to Remain Open Without
Ruling on Dispositive Mot. Until Remaining Resp. and
Supplemental Listing of Missing Bate Stamped Exs. are Filed
with Court (ECF No. 573) (Pl.'s Second
Mot.). From August 1 through August 7, 2018, all
Somerset County Defendants filed responses to Mr. Stile's
motions. On August 1, 2018, the Somerset County Defendants
(except Somerset County, Sheriff Barry DeLong, Jail
Administrator David Allen, Corrections Officer Mayhew,
Corrections Officer Welch, Corrections Officer Jacques, and
Deputy Sheriff Kline) filed an objection to Mr. Stile's
motion for judicial intervention and to accept partial
response. Defs.' Obj. to Pl.'s Mot. for Judicial
Intervention (Document No. 568) and Mot. to Accept Partial
Resp. (Document No. 573) (ECF No. 579) (Somerset I
Resp.). On August 2, 2018, Somerset County and former
Somerset County Sheriff Barry DeLong filed an objection to
Mr. Stile's motion for judicial intervention.
Defs.' Somerset County and Former Somerset County
Sheriff Barry DeLong's Obj. to Pl.'s Mot. for
Judicial Intervention (ECF No. 580) (Somerset II
Resp.). On August 3, 2018, Corrections Officers Plourd
and Jacques filed a consolidated response to the motion for
judicial intervention and to Mr. Stile's motion to accept
partial response. Opp'n by Defs. Keith Plourd and
Jeffrey Jacques to Pl.'s Mot. for Judicial Intervention
and Mot. to Accept Partial Resp. (ECF No. 581) (No.
1:13-cv-00248-JAW) (Somerset III Resp.). On August
7, 2018, Defendant David Allen, the Somerset County Jail
Administrator, filed a response to Mr. Stile's motions
for judicial intervention and to accept partial response.
Def. David Allen's Objs. to Pl.'s Mot. for
Judicial Intervention (ECF No. 568) and Mot. to Accept
Partial Resp. (ECF No. 573) (ECF No. 584) (Allen
August 6, 2018, Mr. Stile filed a reply in both cases, which
he titled “Notice of Case Status.” Pl.'s
Reply (ECF No. 245) (No. 2:14-cv-00406-JAW); (ECF No.
582) (No. 1:13-cv-00248-JAW) (Pl.'s Reply). On
August 27, 2018, Mr. Stile filed an affidavit in support of
his motion for judicial intervention in both the Somerset and
Cumberland County cases, attaching exhibits. Aff.
Attachs. 1-15 (ECF No. 246) (2:14-cv-00406-JAW); (ECF No.
590) (No. 1:13-cv-00248-JAW).
August 31, 2018, Mr. Stile filed yet another motion,
essentially demanding the same relief he demanded in the
other motions. Pl.'s Mot. for Court to Obtain Bate
Stamped Materials from Defs. that Pl. Cited in his Resps. to
Dispositive Pleadings (ECF No. 247) (2:14-cv-00406-JAW);
(ECF No. 593) (No. 1:13-cv-00248-JAW) (Pl.'s Bate
THE PARTIES' POSITIONS
James Stile's Motions
The July 17, 2018 Motion for Judicial Intervention and
James Stile's July 17, 2018 motion for judicial
intervention, he describes his ongoing difficulty gaining
access to necessary information so that he may respond to the
pending dispositive motions in his cases against Somerset and
Cumberland Counties. Pl.'s Mot. at 1-2.
Surprisingly, Mr. Stile places blame for his troubles with
the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) squarely on the Court.
Id. at 2. Mr. Stile makes several demands to the
Court. First, stating that the dispositive motion by
Defendants Keith Plourd and Jeffrey Jacques omitted
“most of the referenced Exhibits that are referred to
by Bates Stamp number” and he “insists this Court
not rule on the Defendants['] dispositive motion without
having access to said Exhibits as there would be a serious
prejudice to the Plaintiff if this were done.”
he complains that the Court failed to schedule a telephone
conference to discuss this issue and he says the Court denied
his request for such. Id. Mr. Stile says that he has
been left “with no understanding of how the Court will
be able to make a fair and unbiased ruling on this
dispositive motion, if the Court does not have access to the
Exhibits and the Plaintiff is unable to even quote the Bates
Stamp numbers.” Id.
Stile writes that he has asked the Court “to at least
communicate with the BOP Allenwood facility legal department
to explain the need of Plaintiff to have access to these
discs in order to do his legal work responsibilities in
responding to the dispositive motions.” Id. He
blames the Court for rejecting “the Plaintiff's
requests for assistance”, and he says the Court
“has refused to intervene.” Id.
Stile criticizes the Court for repeatedly imposing
“deadlines of which the Plaintiff could not possibly
meet even if he was an attorney with modern day resources
such as computer and internet and copier and printer.”
Id. He notes that the BOP transferred him from
F.C.I. Fort Dix to F.C.I. Elkton and that from November 2017
to January 2018, he did not have his legal files and, when
received, they were “in complete disarray.”
Id. at 3. It took him, he says, thirty days
“to sort out and assess the losses which Plaintiff
communication to this Court the need for replacement of a
number of pleadings that BOP lost on the Plaintiff.”
Id. Mr. Stile acknowledges that the Clerk of Court
“replaced a number of those pleadings”, but he
reiterates that he did not have the “necessary legal
files” until the end of February, 2018. Id.
Stile continues to complain that he did not have access to
the CD/DVDs “that are necessary to respond to the
dispositive motions” and even so, the “Court
continues to set deadlines for the Plaintiff that cannot be
met.” Id. As of July 10, 2018, Mr. Stile says
he received only ten of the seventy-five discs. Id.
Mr. Stile “insists that the Court communicate with the
[BOP] on facilitating access to the remaining discs in a more