Grundon v. Pennington et al

Filing 45

ORDER that pltf's 42 Motion for Clarification and 44 Motion for a Written Deposition are DENIED; defts shall provide pltf with additional copies of documents as directed. Signed by Magistrate Judge H. David Young on 9/21/11. (vjt)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS LITTLE ROCK DIVISION JAMES GRUNDON ADC #130906 V. PLAINTIFF NO: 4:10CV02017 JMM/HDY BRUCE PENNINGTON et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER Plaintiff filed this complaint on December 16, 2010, alleging that he was denied adequate medical care when he was held in the Saline County Jail awaiting transport to the Arkansas Department of Correction (“ADC”). On September 20, 2011, Plaintiff filed a motion for review and clarification of his discovery requests, and a motion to take the written deposition of non-party J. Lester (docket entries #42 & #44). Plaintiff’s motion for clarification asserts that documents regarding contractual and statutory agreements which Defendants said were previously provided were not, and seeks to clarify his request regarding Saline County Jail procedures as pertaining to jail policy, not simply ADC policy. Based on their discovery responses (docket entry #43), Defendants have apparently already provided Plaintiff with contractual and statutory agreements. However, they are directed to provide Plaintiff with additional copies of the documents. Plaintiff needs no motion to clarify a discovery request, and Defendants are directed to respond to his clarified request for jail policy regarding treatment of ADC inmates, as set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In his motion to take Lester’s deposition, Plaintiff has proposed a number of questions 1 relating to his medical care and treatment dates. Plaintiff may request to review his medical records pursuant to ADC policy, and he may seek to introduce such records at any proceeding held in this matter. Additionally, Plaintiff may propose Lester as a witness. Accordingly, a deposition is unnecessary at this time. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Plaintiff’s motion for clarification, and his motion for a written deposition (docket entries #42 & #44) are DENIED. Defendants are directed to provide Plaintiff with additional copies of the contractual and statutory documents they previously agreed to provide, and to respond, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to his clarified discovery request. IT IS SO ORDERED this 21 day of September, 2011. ____________________________________ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

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?