Barnett v. Sims et al

Filing 4

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 MOTION to perpetuate testimony filed by Matthew W. Barnett. Objections to R&R due by 11/27/2009. Signed by Honorable James R. Marschewski on November 9, 2009. (rw)

Download PDF
DISTRICT COURT I}I THE I.]NITEDSIA"TES OF WESTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS F O R TSMITHDIVISION MAT T H E WW. BARNETT PLAINTIFF M i s c . N o . " O?- qL FS R A C H E L J . SIMS; FRANK ATKINSON ; SHERIF'F' a n d GAYLA JACKSON DEFENDANTS B E P O R T A}{D RECOMMENDATION OI'THR MAGISTRATE JUDCE M a t t h e w W. Bamett (hereinaftu Bamett) filed this motion to perpetu te testimonyunder t h e provisionsof Rule 27 o{'the FederalRulcs of Civil Prooedure.Hc also asksto be allowcd to pursuant to Rule 33 of thc Federal Rules of Civil s u b m i t interrogatoriosto the def'endants Procedure. Bncksround B a m c t t indioates expectsto be the plaintiff in a casebrought undcr 42 U.S.C. $ 1983, he H e asscltshe is presontlyunableto bring thc casein a moaninglul lbrm and consistentwith thc pleadirrg requirements g 1983. of f l a m e t t nraintainsthat thc first day he was incarcerated the Sebastian in County Adult D e t e f l t i o nCcntcr$372wasillegally takenftomhim. He maintainsthemoneywasinitially, withoLrt h i s pemrission, placcd in his comrnissary account. The moncy was thon, without any hearingor o t h e r fbrm ofDue Prooess, taken and appliedto his fines and costs. A l t h o u g hBamett statss hasheeninfbrmcdthattJre he moneywaslakanpursuant a verbal to c o u l order,he asserts thoreis no tecotd ofthc verbalcourl ottler on thc docketsheet.At this timc, he actedindividually or B a m e t t $tates is rurableto "dctcrminedefinitely whether"thc defendants -l- AO7?A ( R e v .8/82) that defendants no legal authority had hc to Furtherhe states desires establish a sco-conspirators. t o takehis monsyor keephis money. Bamettmaintains factswill assisthinr in properlynaming the p a r t i c sand dcterminewhetherthete are otherpartieswho shouldbe named. Discussion testirnony beforoanactioni$ filed. for to l L u l e27(a)govemsrequosts depositions porpotuate L h x l e rRulo 27(a)(l), the petitionermust title the petition in his narneand establish: ( A ) that thc pctitioncr expectsto be a patty to an actiorrcognizahle in a Uflited S t a t e scourl but cannot presentlybring it or causeit to be brought; ( B ) the subjeot interest; actionandthe petitioner's matterofthe expected and ( (l ) the lhctsthatthepetitioner testirnony wants establish theproposed to by rcasons perpetuate to it; thc (D ) thenames a description to ofthe persons whomthc pctitioncrcxpccts bc or partiesarrdtheit addres$es, far asknowu;and advcrse so (E )thenamc, addrcss, expected and testiftonyofeachdepo enl. substaflce o{'the F e dR. Civ.P.27(aX1XA-E). . R u l c 27(a)(l ) flray nr)t be usoil asa lioensefor oonductinggeneraldiscoveryprior to the 644 F.2d 3 86, 388 (Sth Cir. l98l). i n s l i t u t i o Tofa oivil action. ,9ee r Acands,Int'.. e.g.,,Sftdrev. l n s t e a d ,discoveryundcr Rulc 27(a)(l ) shouldbe allowed only when the petitioner demonstrates e.g.,Mdrtin v. a prcscntinability to hring any action at the time the petition is presented. S'ee in R e , y n o l t l s , 2 9 7 49, 55 (9th Cir. 1961).Rule27 applics situations which "lbrtrneteason to F.2d o r anothcr,testimonymight be lost to a prospectivelitigant unlesstaken irnrnediately."Petition F.R.D.89,91(S.D.N.Y.1943). o f Ferluu.f,3 -2- AO72A (Rev.8/82) to C l e a rl y ,this is not orreof tho$esituations.BarncttInerelyseeks tlo earlygeneral lre He in underRule 27 iur#or by theuseof intenogatorics. doesnot argue discovery this case he maintains will bc ableto at will notbc ablcto obtainthis discovery a latertime. He rnerely of now instead later. This would be truein helretdtdft his complaintif hc hasthis discovcry virtuallyeveryoase. Conclusion to testintony undcrRule27 and/or I therefore reoommend themotionto perpetrate that actionbc beforethe actionis filed be deniedand this miscellaneous submitintenogatories closcd. in B f l r n e t thflsten dflysfrom receiptof this report and recommendntion whichto pursuant to 28 U.S.C.$ 636(b[l ). The failure to lile timely f i l e written objections ohiection s may result in waiver of the right to appeal questionsof f[ct' Bsrnett is to rnustheboth timelyandspecific triggerdenovoreviewby the reminded that obJections district tourt, I )A T E D this ? ctay Novemher 2009. of MAGISTRATE JTJDGE STATES -3- AO72A (Rev.8i82)

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?