Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Hunnicutt v. Moore, 2:18-cv-00667-JB-KRS. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. New Mexico Number: infdco20190920a55 Visitors: 10
Filed: Sep. 19, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 19, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY KEVIN R. SWEAZEA , Magistrate Judge . THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendants' motion for a protective order seeking to avoid discovery from Plaintiff (Doc. 12), and Plaintiff's motion for discovery asking permission to propound requests on Defendants. 1 (Doc. 13). Having considered the parties' submissions related to these motions along with record in this case, the Court denies both with
More

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendants' motion for a protective order seeking to avoid discovery from Plaintiff (Doc. 12), and Plaintiff's motion for discovery asking permission to propound requests on Defendants.1 (Doc. 13). Having considered the parties' submissions related to these motions along with record in this case, the Court denies both without prejudice.

Prisoner complaints are excluded from pre-trial case management procedures, including discovery obligations, under the Court's local rules. See D.N.M.LR-Civ. 16.3(d). Thus, the parties are not obliged to engage in or respond to discovery. Additionally, the complaint in this case is subject to screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Under that statute, the Court may dismiss a prisoner civil rights complaint sua sponte "if the complaint . . . . is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted." 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). That screening function has not yet occurred, and there is a pending dispositive motion. If the complaint survives screening and/or dispositive motion practice, the Court will determine whether to hold a Rule 16 discovery conference otherwise order a Martinez report. See Martinez v. Aaron, 570 F.2d 317 (10th Cir. 1978) (requiring prison officials, if ordered, to (1) thoroughly explain the allegations in a prisoner's complaint; (2) provide the results, if any, of their investigation into the allegations; (3) submit affidavits supporting any facts in the report; and (4) provide copies of all grievances and other documents related to the administrative record).

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Defendants' motion for a protective order (Docs. 12 & 13) are DENIED without prejudice.

FootNotes


1. Plaintiff has also sought discovery under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) in responding to Defendants' motion for summary judgment. (See Doc. 20) This order does not purport to adjudicate Plaintiff's "Rule 56[d] MOTION to Stay consideration of MOTION for Summary Judgment." (Doc. 20). That motion will be taken up as part of resolving the pending dispositive motion.
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