Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

WORRELL v. SPARKS, 5:14-CT-3092-D. (2014)

Court: District Court, E.D. North Carolina Number: infdco20140708a57 Visitors: 10
Filed: Jul. 07, 2014
Latest Update: Jul. 07, 2014
Summary: ORDER ROBERT B. JONES, Jr., Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs' motion for discovery [DE-12], to which Defendants have failed to respond. For the reasons that follow, the motion will be denied. This case was removed by Defendants from Wayne County Superior Court. Plaintiffs Demar Worrell and Anthony Velasquez ("Plaintiffs"), pretrial detainees proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against the Wayne County Jail and two jail sergeants, alleging violations of their co
More

ORDER

ROBERT B. JONES, Jr., Magistrate Judge.

This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs' motion for discovery [DE-12], to which Defendants have failed to respond. For the reasons that follow, the motion will be denied.

This case was removed by Defendants from Wayne County Superior Court. Plaintiffs Demar Worrell and Anthony Velasquez ("Plaintiffs"), pretrial detainees proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against the Wayne County Jail and two jail sergeants, alleging violations of their constitutional rights. [DE-1-1]. On June 2, 2014, the court found that Plaintiffs' conditions of confinement claim against the sergeants survived frivolity review and dismissed the claims against the jail. [DE-9]. A Scheduling Order was entered on June 2, 2014, which provides that motions are due not later than August 1, 2014. [DE-10]. Plaintiffs then filed the instant motion for discovery on June 11, 2014. [DE-12].

In Plaintiffs' motion for discovery, they request the production of several documents. It is unclear whether Plaintiffs served Defendants with document requests pursuant to Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which is the appropriate means to obtain documents from a party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a). Accordingly, the motion for discovery is DENIED. However, given Plaintiffs' prose status and the current motions deadline, the court will construe Plaintiffs' motion for discovery as a request for production of documents propounded to Defendants. The court notes that a certificate of service indicates the motion for discovery was served on Defendants' counsel. [DE-12] at 2. Therefore, to the extent Defendants have not already done so, they shall produce any responsive documents, in conformity with Rule 26 and Rule 34, by no later than July 21, 2014.

SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer