Earls v. Hughes et al

Filing 53

ORDER denying as moot 38 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney on 7/1/11. (kpr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION JACOB THOMAS EARLS, ADC #114556 v. PLAINTIFF 5:10-cv-00299-BSM-JTK JOE HUGHES, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel (Doc. No. 38). Defendants filed a Response to the Motion (Doc. No. 43). In his Motion, Plaintiff states that Defendants have not responded to his discovery requests. In their Response, Defendants state they properly responded to three sets of discovery received from Plaintiff, and that had Plaintiff complied with Local Rule 7.2 by conferring with them prior to filing his Motion, they would have re-mailed their responses. Defendants attach a copy of their discovery responses (Doc No. 43-1) and ask that Plaintiff’s Motion be denied. In light of Defendants’ Response, the Court will deny the Motion. The Court also reminds Plaintiff of his responsibility to confer in good faith with Defendants prior to filing discovery-related motions, pursuant to Local Rule 7.2. Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel (Doc. No. 38) is DENIED as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED this 1st day of July, 2011. ______________________________________ JEROME T. KEARNEY 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?