Bruce Haney v. A. Nelson

MEMORANDUM

Bruce Patrick Haney, a pro se prisoner litigant, appeals the district court’s order granting a Motion for Summary Judgment brought by correctional officers A.L. Nelson and R. Saldana. On appeal, Haney contends that the district court abused its discretion by granting summary judgment in favor of the correctional officers before allowing Haney to complete discovery. We agree.

The district court’s refusal to permit further discovery is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Landmark Dev. Corp. v. Chambers Corp., 752 F.2d 369 , 373 (9th Cir.1985) (per curiam). “[S]ummary judgment is disfavored where relevant evidence remains to be discovered, particularly in cases involving confined pro se plaintiffs.” Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 930 (9th Cir.2004). A timely pending motion to compel further discovery should have alerted the trial court of the need to first address Haney’s discovery motion before taking up the prison guards’ summary judgment motion. Garrett v. City of San Francisco, 818 F.2d 1515, 1518 (9th Cir. 1987).

Here, the court granted the prison guards’ summary judgment motion before the prison guards complied with Haney’s discovery requests and before they…