Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Glasser v. King

United States District Court, Tenth Circuit

December 5, 2013

WAYNE GLASSER, Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLE KING, RN, MICHAEL WALSH, PA, LT. JAMES HARDING, MICHAEL HANSA, MD, Deceased, through surviving spouse and successor, WEERA-ANONG HANSA, STEPHEN MACKERROW, MD, and PUEBLO CARDIOLOGY ASSOCIATES, PC, Defendants.

ORDER

CRAIG B. SHAFFER, Magistrate Judge.

This matter comes before the court on Plaintiff's "Motion for a Written Ruling Regarding Redacted Documents, or in the Alternative, Transcripts of Verbal Findings Issued from the Bench." Pursuant to the Order of Reference dated April 20, 2012 (Doc. # 12) and the memorandum dated December 4, 2013 (Doc. # 240), this matter was referred to the Magistrate Judge. The court has reviewed the Motion, the entire case file, and the applicable law and is sufficiently advised in the premises.

On April 17, 2012, the court granted Mr. Glasser leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (See Doc. # 8). Section 1915(c) provides:

[u]pon the filing of an affidavit in accordance with subsections (a) and (b) and the prepayment of any partial filing fee as may be required under subsection (b), the court may direct payment by the United States of the expenses of (1) printing the record on appeal in any civil or criminal case, if such printing is required by the appellate court; (2) preparing a transcript of proceedings before a United States magistrate in any civil or criminal case, if such transcript is required by the district court, in the case of proceedings conducted under section 636(b) of this title or under section 3401(b) of title 18, United States Code; and (3) printing the record on appeal if such printing is required by the appellate court, in the case of proceedings conducted pursuant to section 636(c) of this title....

On September 23, 2013, the court granted in part and denied in part Mr. Glasser's Motion for In Camera Review. ( See Doc. # 198; Courtroom Minutes/Minute Order (Doc. # 204)). At hearings held on October 1, 2013, November 12, 2013, and November 19, 2013, Mr. Glasser raised additional arguments regarding the material reviewed by the court in camera. ( See Courtroom Minutes/Minute Orders (Docs. # 228, # 230, # 231)). Mr. Glasser seeks transcripts of the October 1, 2013, November 12, 2013, and November 19, 2013 hearings in order to file his objections to the Magistrate Judge's rulings regarding the material reviewed in camera. The court concludes that under these circumstances, transcripts of the October 1, 2013, November 12, 2013, and November 19, 2013 hearings are necessary pursuant to § 1915(c) for Mr. Glasser to seek review by the District Judge's of the proceedings conducted under section 636(b) by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's "Motion for a Written Ruling Regarding Redacted Documents, or in the Alternative, Transcripts of Verbal Findings Issued from the Bench" (filed December 4, 2013) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.

2. The Clerk of the Court shall have transcripts of the October 1, 2013, November 12, 2013, and November 19, 2013 hearings prepared and copies of the transcripts provided to Plaintiff on or before January 4, 2014.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.