Arthur v. Thomas et al (DEATH PENALTY)

Filing 116

ORDERED that Plf's objection as to Judge Moorer's 102 Order denying Plf's Motion to Compel the Deposition of Dfts' Expert Witness, Dr. Mark Dershwitz, which is contained in Plf's 107 Objections, is OVERRULED as MOOT. Signed by Honorable Judge Mark E. Fuller on 10/31/2012. (wcl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
THOMAS D. ARTHUR,
Plaintiff,
v.
KIM THOMAS, Commissioner
Alabama Department of Corrections, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 2:11-cv-438-MEF
(WO – Do Not Publish)

ORDER
Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Objections and Responses to United States Magistrate Judge
Terry F. Moorer’s October 10 and October 12, 2012 Orders (“Objections”) (Doc. #107), which was
filed on October 16, 2012. The Court finds that Plaintiff’s objection as to Judge Moorer’s Order
denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel the Deposition of Defendants’ Expert Witness, Dr. Mark
Dershwitz (Doc. #102), which is contained in Plaintiff’s Objections (Doc. #107), is due to be
OVERRULED as MOOT.
On October 9, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel the deposition testimony of
Defendants’ expert witness, Dr. Mark Dershwitz. (Pl.’s Mot. to Compel, Doc. #84.) More
specifically, Plaintiff requested an order directing that Dr. Dershwitz’s deposition be conducted
prior to the October 18–19, 2012 evidentiary hearing (the “hearing”) in this case. (Doc. #84, at 1.)
Judge Moorer denied Plaintiff’s motion on October 12, 2012, concluding there was no time
for the deposition to take place prior to the hearing given Dr. Dershwitz’s limited availability in
the week of the hearing. (Doc. #102, at 1.) However, Judge Moorer gave Plaintiff leave to
conduct a follow-up deposition of Dr. Dershwitz after the hearing. (Doc. #102, at 2.)

Considering the foregoing, this Court finds that Plaintiff’s objection as to Judge Moorer’s
order prohibiting Plaintiff from conducting a pre-hearing deposition of Dr. Dershwitz is now moot
given that the evidentiary hearing in this case has concluded. Plaintiff may conduct a follow-up
deposition of Dr. Dershwitz if Plaintiff so chooses.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s objection as to Judge Moorer’s October
12, 2012 Order denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel the Deposition of Defendants’ Expert
Witness, Dr. Mark Dershwitz (Doc. #102), which is contained in Plaintiff’s Objections (Doc.
#107), is OVERRULED as MOOT.
st

DONE this the 31 day of October, 2012.
/s/ Mark E. Fuller
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2