ALEXANDER v. HOFFMAN, 15-10294. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan
Number: infdco20151210b92
Visitors: 34
Filed: Dec. 09, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 09, 2015
Summary: ORDER R. STEVEN WHALEN , Magistrate Judge . On January 23, 2015, Plaintiff D'Andre Alexander, a prison inmate in the custody of the Michigan Department of Corrections ("MDOC"), filed a pro se civil complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983, bringing 19 separate claims and naming (or in some instances partially naming) 21 Defendants. The complaint and exhibits consume 152 pages. Before the Court is the MDOC Defendants' Motion to Stay Discovery [Doc. #55]. The Defendants' motion to sever base
Summary: ORDER R. STEVEN WHALEN , Magistrate Judge . On January 23, 2015, Plaintiff D'Andre Alexander, a prison inmate in the custody of the Michigan Department of Corrections ("MDOC"), filed a pro se civil complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983, bringing 19 separate claims and naming (or in some instances partially naming) 21 Defendants. The complaint and exhibits consume 152 pages. Before the Court is the MDOC Defendants' Motion to Stay Discovery [Doc. #55]. The Defendants' motion to sever based..
More
ORDER
R. STEVEN WHALEN, Magistrate Judge.
On January 23, 2015, Plaintiff D'Andre Alexander, a prison inmate in the custody of the Michigan Department of Corrections ("MDOC"), filed a pro se civil complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, bringing 19 separate claims and naming (or in some instances partially naming) 21 Defendants. The complaint and exhibits consume 152 pages. Before the Court is the MDOC Defendants' Motion to Stay Discovery [Doc. #55].
The Defendants' motion to sever based on misjoinder of parties and claims [Doc. #39] is presently pending. If the motion is granted, it will be dispositive as to claims and Defendants, and the scope of discovery will likely be significantly narrower. "Trial courts have broad discretion and inherent power to stay discovery until preliminary questions that may dispose of the case are determined." Hahn v. Star Bank, 190 F.3d 708, 719 (6th Cir. 1999).
Accordingly, Defendants' Motion to Stay Discovery [Doc. #55] is GRANTED, and discovery is STAYED pending resolution of the Defendants' motion to sever.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
