Carter v. South Dakota Dept. of Corrections et al, No. 4:2022cv04103 - Document 47 (D.S.D. 2023)
Court Description: OPINION and ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Renewed Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Request for This Court to Investigate his Claims, and Motion Compelling 24/7 Access to Lexis/Nexis. Signed by Chief Judge Roberto A. Lange on 07/17/2023. cc: mailed to Matthew Carter via USPS (KLE)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Carter v. South Dakota Dept. of Corrections et al Doc. 47 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 1 of 18 PageID #: 569 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION MATTHEW CARTER, 4:22-CV-04103-RAL Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S RENEWED MOTION FOR vs. KELLIE WASKO, SECRETARY OF CORRECTIONS, OFFICIAL CAPACITY; TERESA BITTINGER, WARDEN, OFFICIAL CAPACITY; JESSICA COOK, ASSOCIATE WARDEN, OFFICIAL CAPACITY; SAMUEL YOST, UNIT COORDINATOR, OFFICIAL CAPACITY; CRAIG MOUSEL, MAIL ROOM CLERK, OFFICIAL CAPACITY; TAMMY MERTENS-JONES, CULTURAL SPIRITUAL ACTIVITIES COORDINATOR, OFFICIAL CAPACITY; ARAMARK CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, LLC, IN ITS INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES; AND MARTIN'S INC., IN ITS INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES; TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, REQUEST FOR THIS COURT TO INVESTIGATE HIS CLAIMS,AND MOTION COMPELLING 24/7 ACCESS TO LEXIS/NEXIS Defendants. Plaintiff Matthew Carter, an inmate at the South Dakota State Penitentiary ("SDSP"), filed a pro se lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Doc. 1. This Court granted Carter leave to proceed in forma pauperis and ordered him to pay an initial filing fee. Doc. 6. After Carter timely paid his initial fee, this Court screened Carter's complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, dismissing the complaint in part and directing service upon defendants in part. Doc. 11. After his complaint was screened but before defendants had been served. Carter filed a motion to amend his complaint to add new defendants and to bring additional claims against the existing Dockets.Justia.com Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 2 of 18 PageID #: 570 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 3 of 18 PageID #: 571 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 4 of 18 PageID #: 572 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 5 of 18 PageID #: 573 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 6 of 18 PageID #: 574 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 7 of 18 PageID #: 575 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 8 of 18 PageID #: 576 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 9 of 18 PageID #: 577 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 10 of 18 PageID #: 578 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 11 of 18 PageID #: 579 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 12 of 18 PageID #: 580 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 13 of 18 PageID #: 581 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 14 of 18 PageID #: 582 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 15 of 18 PageID #: 583 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 16 of 18 PageID #: 584 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 17 of 18 PageID #: 585 Case 4:22-cv-04103-RAL Document 47 Filed 07/17/23 Page 18 of 18 PageID #: 586
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
