Williams v. Whitfield et al

Filing 271

ORDER denying 266 Motion to Vacate ; denying 267 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 6/8/10. (bkp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT E A S T E R N DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS E A S T E R N DIVISION A L M. WILLIAMS #362773 V. CASE NO. 2:09CV00100 JLH/BD DEFENDANTS

PLAINTIFF

L O N N I E WHITFIELD, et al.

ORDER P la in tif f has filed a motion to vacate and a motion to compel. (Docket entries # 2 6 6 and #267) Plaintiff's motions (#266 and #267) are DENIED. I. M o tio n to Vacate In Plaintiff's motion to vacate, he requests that the Court reconsider its order c o m p e llin g him to pay the $455.00 appellate filing fee. Plaintiff cannot avoid paying the f ilin g fee of his appeal in this matter. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion (#266) is DENIED. II. M o tio n to Compel In his motion to compel, Plaintiff requests the Court order Defendants Whitfield, R o b in so n , and Bell to produce a copy of his jail file and copies of the jail's security logs f ro m May 31, 2009 through June 30, 2009. (#267) Defendants have responded to P la in tif f 's motion, stating that they have previously explained that Plaintiff's jail file is lo s t and cannot be produced. They further argue that the request for security logs is o v e rly broad and not calculated to lead to admissible evidence. (#268) In addition, D e f e n d a n ts contend that Plaintiff's requests are duplicative.

Defendants' response has merit, and the motion (#267) is denied. However, D e f e n d a n ts are reminded that they must produce the lost jail file immediately, if it re a p p e a rs. IT IS SO ORDERED this 8th day of June, 2010.

____________________________________ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2