Delaney v. Jamaldeen et al, No. 1:2017cv00767 - Document 89 (E.D. Va. 2019)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Claude M. Hilton on 11/4/2019. (See order for further details). (acha, ) Copy sent to Plaintiff Pro-Se.
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Delaney v. Jamaldeen et al Doc. 89 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division George Frederick Delaney Plaintiff, I:17cv767(CMH/MSN) V. Dr. Abdul H.Jamaludeen,et al.. Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION George F. Delaney, a former inmate at Virginia Beach Correctional Center(VBCC), has brought a pro se civil rights action against Dr. Abdul Jamaludeen, alleging violations of his constitutional rights,s^ 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983,and Virginia tort law.' Dr. Jamaludeen has filed a second motion for summary judgment, supported by a legal memorandum and exhibits.^ [Dkt. Nos. 73-74]. Delaney received the notice required by Local Rule 7(K)and Roseboro v. Garrison. 528 F.2d 309(4th Cir. 1975), and filed a response in opposition.^ [Dkt. Nos. 75,87]. Delaney also has moved for appointment of counsel and immediate injunctive relief.[Dkt. Nos. 'Delaney has also named as a defendant Marie Kuchta, a dietician at VBCC.To date, she has not been served. Therefore, Delaney will be directed to fill out and return the U.S. Marshals Form 285 attached to the accompanying Order. 2 Dr. Jamaludeen also relies on exhibits attached to a memorandum in support of a motion for summary judgment filed by Sheriff Kenneth Stolle [Dkt. No. 43], who was dismissed from this lawsuit in an Order dated September 24, 2018 [Dkt. No. 64]. ^ Shortly before a response was due, Delaney moved the Court for additional time to respond to Dr. Jamaludeen's motion for summary judgment.[Dkt. No. 82]. He later filed what he labeled a motion for summary judgment, which contests Jamaludeen's motion.[Dkt. No. 87]. The Court construes that motion as one opposing Jamaludeen's and will grant nunc pro tune Delaney's motion for an extension oftime. Additionally, because his motion directs the Court to the evidence he filed with his verified complaint, the Court will consider his sworn statement and accompanying evidence. S^ Williams v. Griffin. 952 F.2d 820,823(4th Cir. 1991)("[A] verified complaint is the equivalent of an opposing affidavit for summary judgment purposes, when the allegations contained therein are based on personal knowledge."); see also Williamson V. Stirling. 912 F.3d 154, 160(4th Cir. 2018)(accepting as evidence at summary judgment pro sq plaintiffs verified complaint). Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
