Polk v. Pulaski County et al
ORDER granting 90 Plaintiff's Motion to Continue and granting 91 Motion for Costs. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 04/25/2012. (kcs)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
North Little Rock Police Department, et al.
There are two non dispositive Motions pending in this § 1983 action. The
Court will address each Motion separately.
I. Plaintiff’s Motion for a Continuance
This case is currently set for a jury trial on July 17, 2012. See docket entry
#87. Plaintiff has filed a Motion seeking a continuance of the July 17, 2012 jury trial
so that he may conduct additional discovery. See docket entry #90. Specifically,
Plaintiff seeks an additional 90 days to complete discovery and 120 days to file
Motions. Id. Importantly, Plaintiff states that Defendants do not object to his request.
Id. Accordingly, the Motion for a Continuance is granted. A Revised Scheduling
Order imposing a new jury trial date and other deadlines will be separately entered.
II. Plaintiff’s Motion for Preapproval of Costs
Appointed counsel for Plaintiff has filed a Motion seeking preapproval of
reimbursement from the Library Fund of costs he will incur deposing eight
individuals, which include some of the six Defendants and other unspecified
witnesses. See docket entry #91. Counsel estimates that it will cost approximately
$2,500 in court reporter fees to depose all eight individuals. Id.
The Court finds Plaintiff’s request to be reasonable and in compliance with
Local Rule 83.6. Thus, the Motion is granted. After Plaintiff has finished the
depositions, he should file a Motion for Reimbursement that includes documentation
establishing the costs that were actually incurred.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
Plaintiff’s Motion for a Continuance (docket entry #90) is GRANTED.
Plaintiff’s Motion for Preapproval of Costs (docket entry #91) is
Dated this 25th day of April, 2012
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?