London et al v. Reece et al

Filing 86

ORDER denying 80 Motion to Compel; and denying 81 Motion to Produce Documents. Signed by Honorable James R. Marschewski on April 1, 2010. (lw)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION LLOYD LONDON v. CASE NO. 07-2087 PLAINTIFF JIMMY DORNEY, Sheriff, Johnson County; RUTH ANN HOWELL, Administrator, Johnson County Jail; JERRY DORNEY, Chief Deputy, Johnson County ORDER DEFENDANTS Now before the Court is the Motion to Compel (Doc. 80) and Motion to Produce (Doc. 81) filed by the Plaintiff. On these motions, Plaintiff seeks to compel the following documents or have them produced by his former attorney: 1) pro se petition filed on December 1, 2008 in Circuit Court of Johnson County; 2) pro se petition filed on July 21, 2008 in Johnson County; 3) pro se petition mailed on November 21, 2008; 4) state habeas corpus mailed on July 20, 2009; 5) federal habeas corpus mailed on July 20, 2009; 6) notice of appeal mailed on September 9, 2009; 7) bible located at 1085 County Road 1966, Knoxville, Arkansas 72845; and 8) writ of prohibition, in the alternative writ of certiorari or writ of mandamus mailed November 21, 2008. The undersigned has held an evidentiary hearing in this matter and has received all exhibits necessary for submitting a report and recommendation to the district judge. The Court does not find any of Plaintiff's requested documents, beyond what the Court has already asked to be provided, to be relevant to this case. The Motion to Compel (Doc. 80) and Motion for Production of Documents (Doc. 81) are DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED this 1st day of April 2010. /s/ J. Marschewski HON. JAMES MARSCHEWSKI UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE -1-

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?