Hayes v. Valdez et al, No. 1:2009cv00122 - Document 176 (D. Idaho 2013)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE MOTION TO APPOINT AMICUS denying 164 Motion to Appoint the Department of Justice and United States Attorney for the District of Idaho as Amicus Curiae. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjm)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO Michael T. Hayes Case No. 1:09-cv-00122-BLW Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE MOTION TO APPOINT AMICUS v. Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), et al., Defendant. INTRODUCTION Pending before the Court is plaintiff Michael T. Hayes Motion to Appoint the Department of Justice and United States Attorney for the District of Idaho as Amicus Curiae (Dkt. 164). For the reasons explained below, the Court will deny the motion. BACKGROUND Hayes was incarcerated at the Idaho Correctional Center, a private prison, from approximately 2004 through 2012. On April 14, 2007, Hayes was beaten and robbed by two other inmates. In March 2009, Hayes sued under 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983, alleging that the MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 1 prison and various prison employees violated his Eighth Amendment rights. After this Court s summary judgment decisions, the only remaining claims are Hayes failure-toprotect claims against prison employees Brian Doser and Justin Acosta. Trial is set for March 11, 2013. ANALYSIS The decision to appoint an amicus is discretionary. See e.g., Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1260 (9th Cir. 1982), abrogated in part on other grounds by Sandin v. Connor, 515 U.S. 472 (1995). Plaintiff should recognize that there is a distinction between counsel appointed to represent the plaintiff and amicus counsel appointed to assist the court. See e.g., United States v. Dougherty, 473 F.2d 1113, 1125 n.18 (D.C. Cir. 1972). Plaintiff s request is most unusual. In the Court s experience, a third party whose interest may be affected by the outcome of a proceeding may request leave to participate as amicus curiae. The Court has not been advised that the Department of Justice or the U.S. Attorney for the District of Idaho desires to participate in this proceeding. Additionally, the Court does not believe appointment of amicus would assist the Court in resolving this case. The Court will therefore deny the motion. MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 2 ORDER Plaintiff s Motion to Appoint the Department of Justice and United States Attorney for the District of Idaho as Amicus Curiae (Dkt. 164) is DENIED. DATED: February 20, 2013 _________________________ B. Lynn Winmill Chief Judge United States District Court MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 3
]]>
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.
