STIFF v. EVANS, 5:14CV00055 JTR. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20150326993
Visitors: 11
Filed: Mar. 25, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 25, 2015
Summary: ORDER 1 J. THOMAS RAY , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff has filed a Motion arguing that he should be granted summary judgment, as discovery sanction, because Defendants failed to timely comply with the January 12, 2015 Order directing them to produce certain documents. Docs. 46 & 48. On March 23, 2015, the Court entered an Order resolving that discovery dispute without imposing any sanctions. Doc. 49. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 48) is DE
Summary: ORDER 1 J. THOMAS RAY , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff has filed a Motion arguing that he should be granted summary judgment, as discovery sanction, because Defendants failed to timely comply with the January 12, 2015 Order directing them to produce certain documents. Docs. 46 & 48. On March 23, 2015, the Court entered an Order resolving that discovery dispute without imposing any sanctions. Doc. 49. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 48) is DEN..
More
ORDER1
J. THOMAS RAY, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff has filed a Motion arguing that he should be granted summary judgment, as discovery sanction, because Defendants failed to timely comply with the January 12, 2015 Order directing them to produce certain documents. Docs. 46 & 48. On March 23, 2015, the Court entered an Order resolving that discovery dispute without imposing any sanctions. Doc. 49.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 48) is DENIED.
FootNotes
1. On May 12, 2014, the parties consented to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Doc. 17.
Source: Leagle
