Case Law Hughbanks v. Fluke

Hughbanks v. Fluke

Document Cited Authorities (11) Cited in (1) Related

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S PENDING MOTIONS

KAREN E. SCHREIER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiff Kevin Lee Hughbanks, filed a pro se lawsuit under 42 U.S.C § 1983. Dockets 5, 20. Hughbanks alleges that his conditions of confinement at Mike Durfee State Prison (MDSP) violate his constitutional rights. Hughbanks has named as defendants current and former employees of the South Dakota Department of Corrections and Department of Health (State defendants), Summit Food Service and its current and former employees, and Global Tel Link Corporation. Docket 20 at 1-10. Hughbanks alleges deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs, unsanitary conditions, and inadequate nutrition in violation of his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. He alleges lack of meaningful access to the courts in violation of his First Amendment rights. He challenges the inmate correspondence policy, contending it violates his First Amendment rights. He also challenges the Sex Offender Management Program policies, contending they violate his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process and his Fifth Amendment right to be free from self-incrimination.

Hughbanks has filed motions seeking assistance with service substitution of parties, preliminary injunctive relief and additional miscellaneous relief. Below the court outlines additional factual and procedural background pertinent to the court's ruling on each of the pending motions.

I. Motions for Assistance with Service
A. Department of Corrections

After the amended complaint was filed, the clerk's office issued thirty-seven summonses and delivered the summonses, along with the amended complaint and the amended 1915A screening order, to the United States Marshal Service (USMS) in Sioux Falls for service. Docket 21. The USMS was unable to serve Jennifer Dreiske, Mike Leidholt, Tim Reisch, Laine Schryers, Tammy Top, and Darin Young because they are no longer employed by the Department of Corrections. Docket 25. The USMS was also unable to serve the summonses issued to Ed Ligtenberg, Anne Hajek, Kevin Krull, Mark Smith, Paige Wilbur Bock, and Dave Nelson. Docket 40. Ligtenberg, Hajek, Krull, Smith, and Wilbur Bock are auxiliary members of the South Dakota Board of Pardons and Paroles and are not regularly at the address in the summonses. Id. at 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18. Nelson is no longer at the address in the summons. Id. at 19, 21. Hughbanks has filed motions for assistance with service. See Dockets 62, 80, 85, 95, 110.

Hughbanks has not filed a motion to extend the time for service, but the court construes his motion for a temporary restraining order (Docket 80) to include a request that the court find that there is good cause to extend the time for service. More than ninety days have elapsed since the amended complaint was filed, but the court finds that there is good cause for extending the time for service on the defendants who are no longer employed with the Department of Corrections and the auxiliary members of the South Dakota Board of Pardons and Paroles. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m) ([I]f the plaintiff shows good cause . . ., the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period.”). After the summonses for Dreiske, Leidholt, Reisch, Schryers, Top, Young, Ligtenberg, Hajek, Krull, Smith, Wilbur Bock, and Nelson were returned unexecuted, Hughbanks diligently attempted to obtain these defendants' addresses. See Dockets 62, 80, 85, 95, 110. But he does not have internet access, and prison policy prohibits him from attempting to locate the addresses of the unserved defendants. Docket 80 at 4. Hughbanks has been unable to locate addresses for the defendants who are no longer employed with the Department of Corrections or the auxiliary parole board members. Docket 110 at 1. The court extends the time for serving defendants Dreiske, Leidholt, Reisch, Schryers, Top, Young, Ligtenberg, Hajek, Krull, Smith, Wilbur Bock, and Nelson until March 28, 2023.

In his motion for names and service addresses (Docket 62), Hughbanks requests that counsel for...

1 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — District of South Dakota – 2024
Scott v. Haynes
"...Directly Responsible Clinician, Unit Coordinator Robinson, Linda of Aramark, Chef Tanya of Aramark, and the Aramark Chief Supervisors.[1] Id. at 1. Unit Coordinator Robinson The U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) was unable to serve Unit Coordinator Robinson because he no longer works for the DOC..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
1 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — District of South Dakota – 2024
Scott v. Haynes
"...Directly Responsible Clinician, Unit Coordinator Robinson, Linda of Aramark, Chef Tanya of Aramark, and the Aramark Chief Supervisors.[1] Id. at 1. Unit Coordinator Robinson The U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) was unable to serve Unit Coordinator Robinson because he no longer works for the DOC..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex