Filed: Feb. 25, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 25, 2015
Summary: ORDER 1 J. THOMAS RAY , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff has filed this pro se action alleging that, while he was in the Dermott City Jail, from December 18 to 28, 2013, Defendants violated his constitutional rights and committed the state tort of negligence by not allowing him to bathe and by denying him medical care for a rash. On October 23, 2014, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel arguing that Defendants failed to answer five of his interrogatories and requests for production of documen
Summary: ORDER 1 J. THOMAS RAY , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff has filed this pro se action alleging that, while he was in the Dermott City Jail, from December 18 to 28, 2013, Defendants violated his constitutional rights and committed the state tort of negligence by not allowing him to bathe and by denying him medical care for a rash. On October 23, 2014, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel arguing that Defendants failed to answer five of his interrogatories and requests for production of document..
More
ORDER1
J. THOMAS RAY, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff has filed this pro se action alleging that, while he was in the Dermott City Jail, from December 18 to 28, 2013, Defendants violated his constitutional rights and committed the state tort of negligence by not allowing him to bathe and by denying him medical care for a rash.
On October 23, 2014, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel arguing that Defendants failed to answer five of his interrogatories and requests for production of documents. Doc. 34. Defendants did not respond to that Motion to Compel. Accordingly, on December 1, 2014, the Court granted the Motion, and gave Defendants fourteen days to answer Plaintiff's discovery requests.
On December 22, 2014, Defendants filed a Statement explaining that they had mailed their answers to this discovery to Plaintiff. Doc. 42.
On January 12, 2015, Plaintiff filed a Second Motion to Compel asserting that Defendants' December 22, 2014 discovery answers were incomplete. Doc. 44. He contends that Defendants' discovery answers refer to "attached" documents that are not included and that he has never received.
Defendants have not responded to the Motion to Compel. The Court will give Defendants until March 6, 2015 to respond to Plaintiff's Second Motion to Compel. If Defendants fail to file a Response by that date, the Court will grant Plaintiff's Second Motion to Compel.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Defendants must file, on or before March 6, 2015, a Response to Plaintiff's Second Motion to Compel (Doc. 44) that includes copies of their discovery answers and documents they have provided to Plaintiff.
