Pleshchuk

(PC) Hicks v. Pleshchuk

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 12, 20252:22-cv-00903California1,957 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DARYL HICKS, No. 2:22-cv-0903 TLN CSK P Plaintiff, v. ORDER PLESHCHUK, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se. Defendant Pleshchuk’s motion to compel discovery responses is before the Court. (ECF No. 51.) As discussed below, defendant Pleshchuk’s motion is granted. I. PLAINTIFF’S ALLEGATIONS This action proceeds on plaintiff’s second amended complaint against defendants Pleshchuk and Powell, alleging that each defendant was deliberately indifferent to plaintiff’s serious mental health needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 16.) II. BACKGROUND On January 24, 2025, counsel for defendant Pleshchuk filed a motion to compel discovery responses to written discovery requests served on plaintiff on July 22, 2024. (ECF No. 51.) Plaintiff did not file an opposition. /// Following plaintiff’s parole, plaintiff sought an extension of time. …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.