J.P. v. Crews (CONSENT)

Filing 14

ORDER denying 5 Motion to open Discovery, as further set out in order. Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 4/27/12. (djy, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
J.P., a minor who sues by and through
his father and next friend,
CHRIS PRICE,
Plaintiff,
v.
D.A. CREWS,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACT. NO. 2:12cv46-CSC
(WO)

ORDER
Before the court is the “Motion to Open Discovery” (Doc. 5) filed by the plaintiff, J.P.
J.P. requests “leave to conduct limited discovery” before the parties have conferred as
required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f).
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d)(1), “[a] party may not seek discovery from any
source before the parties have conferred as required by Rule 26(f), except . . . when
authorized by [the Rules of Civil Procedure], by stipulation, or by court order.” “Although
[Rule 26(d)(1)] does not say so, it is implicit that some showing of good cause should be
made to justify” an order authorizing the commencement of discovery prior to the Rule 26(f)
conference. 8A Charles Alan Wright, et al., Federal Practice & Procedure § 2046.1. See
also Qwest Commc’ns. Int'l., Inc. v. WorldQuest Networks, Inc., 213 F.R.D. 418, 419 (D.
Colo. 2003) ( “[A] party seeking expedited discovery in advance of a Rule 26(f) conference
has the burden of showing good cause for the requested departure from usual discovery

procedures.”)
As grounds for his motion, J.P. argues that he needs to identify the name of a
Department of Youth Services corrections officer whose name is currently unknown so that
the officer can be added as a defendant. (Doc. 5 ¶¶6-7). However, as J.P. states in his
motion: “[t]here is ample time for discovery to be conducted and for an amended complaint
to be filed that includes the name of the unknown officer and proper charges.” (Doc. 5 ¶ 5).
J.P. has not shown good cause for issuance of an order authorizing immediate discovery.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that J.P.’s “Motion to Open Discovery” (Doc. 5) be and is hereby
DENIED.
Done this 27th day of April, 2012.

/s/Charles S. Coody
CHARLES S. COODY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2