Free Memorandum and Order - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:06-cv—O0O11-SLR D0cument4 Filed O1/O9/2006 Page1 01*3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
LEONARD K. BAYLIS, )
Plaintiff, )
v. ) Civ. No. 06-11-SLR
STANLEY TAYLOR, et al., )
Defendant(s). )
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiff, Leonard K. Baylis, an inmate housed at the
Delaware Correctional Center (“DCC"), moves the court for
emergency injunctive relief. (D.I. 3) Plaintiff alleges he has
mental health problems and has been treated for his condition for
many years.
Plaintiff was originally housed at the Howard Young
Correctional Institution (“HRYCI") where he received treatment
for his mental health problems which include seizures, fugue
state, adult ADD, and chronic depression. (D.I. 2) He was
transferred to the DCC on November 17, 2005. He seeks injunctive
relief asserting that since his transfer to the DCC he has not
received the proper medications and mental health therapy. LQ;
When considering a motion for a temporary restraining order
or preliminary injunction, plaintiff must demonstrate that he is
(I) likely to succeed on the merits; (2) denial will result in
irreparable harm; (3) granting the injunction will not result in
irreparable harm to the defendant(s); and, (4) granting the

Case 1:06-cv-00011-SLR Document 4 Filed 01/09/2006 Page 2 of 3
injunction is in the public interest. Maldonado v. Houstoun, 157
F.3d 179, 184 (3d Cir. 1997). “[A]n injunction may not be used
simply to eliminate a possibility of a remote future injury, or a
future invasion of rights,“ Continental Group, Inc. v. Amoco
Chems. Corp., 614 F.2d 351, 359 (3d Cir. 1980)(quoting Holiday
Inns of Am., Inc. v. B & B Corp., 409 F.2d 614, 618 (3d Cir.
1969)). "The relevant inquiry is whether the movant is in danger
of suffering irreparable harm at the time the preliminary
injunction is to be issued." SI Handling Sys., Inc. v. Heisley,
753 F.2d 1244, 1264 (3d Cir. 1985).
Plaintiff's allegations give the court pause. He states
that since his transfer to DCC he is not being administered the
appropriate medications for his conditions. Nor is he receiving
mental health treatment. Therefore, the clerk of the court is
directed to send a copy of this memorandum order to defendants
Stan Taylor, Thomas Carroll and Chris Malaney and to the Attorney
General of the State of Delaware, 820 N. French Street,
Wilmington, Delaware, 19801, so that they may respond to the
request for injunctive relief on these issues.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED this Qgh day of January,
2006, that:
1. The clerk of the court is directed to forward a copy of
plaintiff's complaint and motion for injunctive relief (D.I. 2,
3) and this memorandum order to the defendants and the Attorney
General for the State of Delaware;

Case 1:06-cv-00011-SLR D0cument4 Filed O1/O9/2006 Page30f3
2. On or before January 20, 2006, defendants and the
Attorney General for the State of Delaware shall file a response
to the issues of non—administration of medication and mental
health treatment. The court holds its ruling in abeyance on
these issues.
UNITED STATES §ISTRICT JUDGE