Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Crittendon v. Lombardo, 2:17-cv-01700-RFB-BNW. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20190613d34 Visitors: 7
Filed: Jun. 11, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 11, 2019
Summary: ORDER BRENDA WEKSLER , Magistrate Judge . Presently before the court is pro se plaintiff Joshua H. Crittendon's motion for docket sheet, court order, and transcript (ECF No. 138), filed on January 24, 2019. The motion is unopposed. Also before the court is Crittendon's motion to compel (ECF No. 151), filed on April 23, 2019. Defendants Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, Rogers, Sanchez, Torres, Brown, Patimeteeporn, Senior, Trost, Verduzco, Binko, Reynolds, Johnson, and Williams fil
More

ORDER

Presently before the court is pro se plaintiff Joshua H. Crittendon's motion for docket sheet, court order, and transcript (ECF No. 138), filed on January 24, 2019. The motion is unopposed.

Also before the court is Crittendon's motion to compel (ECF No. 151), filed on April 23, 2019. Defendants Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, Rogers, Sanchez, Torres, Brown, Patimeteeporn, Senior, Trost, Verduzco, Binko, Reynolds, Johnson, and Williams filed a response (ECF No. 152) on May 2, 2019. Crittendon did not file a reply.

I. Motion for docket sheet, court order, and transcript

Crittendon requests a copy of the docket sheet and the court's minutes of proceedings for the hearing held on January 14, 2019. There was not a hearing held in this case on January 14, 2019, but there was a hearing on January 24, 2019. (Mins. of Proceedings (ECF No. 136).) The court therefore understands Crittendon to be requesting the minutes of proceedings from the hearing on January 24, 2019. The court finds there is good cause to grant this request and therefore will order the clerk of court to mail these documents to Crittendon. To the extent Crittendon requests a transcript of the hearing held on January 24, 2019, the motion is denied without prejudice for Crittendon to complete the appropriate transcript designation forms. The court will order the Clerk of Court to mail Crittendon the required forms to request a transcript.

II. Motion to compel

Crittendon moves to compel defendants' responses to interrogatories. His motion states that he is enclosing the responses that are incomplete, but the court did not receive the referenced enclosures. Under Local Rule 26-7, all motions to compel discovery "must set forth in full the text of the discovery originally sought and any response to it." Without the disputed interrogatories and responses, the court is unable to evaluate whether there is a basis to compel discovery under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(3)(B). The court therefore will deny the motion to compel without prejudice.

III. Conclusion

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff Joshua H. Crittendon's motion for docket sheet, court order, and transcript (ECF No. 138) is GRANTED in part and DENIED without prejudice in part as stated in this order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of court must mail Crittendon courtesy copies of (1) the docket sheet, which includes the minutes of proceedings for the hearing held on January 24, 2019 (ECF No. 136), and (2) a transcript order form.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Crittendon's motion to compel (ECF No. 151) is DENIED without prejudice.

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