Porter v. Lumpkin et al

Filing 51

ORDER denying as moot 49 Motion to Compel and for Sanctions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney on 9/23/10. (bkp)

Download PDF
Porter v. Lumpkin et al Doc. 51 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION DARNELL PORTER, #116186 v. NURSE LUMPKIN, et al. ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel and for Sanctions (Doc. No. 49). Defendants filed a Response to the Motion (Doc. No. 50). In support of the Motion, Plaintiff states Defendants have not responded to his discovery requests. In their Response, Defendants state they mailed responses to Plaintiff on September 3, 2010 and September 14, 2010, but they were returned to the Sender due to an insufficient address for the Plaintiff. Defendants state they re-mailed their responses to Plaintiff on September 20, 2010. Defendants attach copies of the correspondence mailed to Plaintiff as exhibits to their Response. In light of the Defendants' Response, the Court finds Plaintiff's Motion should be denied as moot. The Court also finds no evidence of bad faith or motive on the Defendants' part, and therefore, will deny Plaintiff's request for sanctions. Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Compel and for sanctions (Doc. No. 49) is hereby DENIED as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED this 23rd day of September, 2010. 4:09-cv-00890-JTK DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFF ______________________________________ JEROME T. KEARNEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Dockets.Justia.com

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?