Woods v. Singleton et al

Filing 39

ORDER re 38 MOTION to Compel filed by Earl Spencer Woods, Jr. (Complete Motion to Compel due in Response to Order by 6/27/2024.) Signed by Honorable Christy D. Comstock on June 6, 2024.(mll)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
EARL SPENCER WOODS, JR.
ADC #181182
v.

PLAINTIFF

Civil No. 4:23-CV-04080-SOH-CDC

SHERIFF JAMES SINGLETON, Hempstead County Detention Center,
CAPTAIN JAMES WISE, Hempstead County Jail;
ELKIN, Hempstead County Jail; and JAIL GUARD BRYANT,
Hempstead County Jail, individually and in their official capacities,

DEFENDANTS.

ORDER
Plaintiff Earl Spencer Woods, Jr., a prisoner, has filed the above-captioned civil rights
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s self-styled
“Motion for Disclosure of Favorable Evidence Advisory to the Court” (hereinafter “Motion”).
(ECF No. 38).
Upon initial review, it appears that Plaintiff’s Motion is missing page two (2) of eight (8).
See (ECF No. 38). Without this page, it is unclear if the remaining seven (7) pages accurately
captures Plaintiff’s requests of the Court and the basis for those requests. Accordingly, should
Plaintiff wish for this Court to consider his Motion, he is DIRECTED to refile the entire
submission within 21 days of the date of this order, failing which this Court will deny the
motion for failure to comply with court orders.
Further, to the extent that Plaintiff’s Motion is a request to compel Defendant to produce
discovery, Plaintiff is CAUTIONED that the Court’s scheduling order, see (ECF No. 27), and
Local Rule 7.2(g) require parties to confer in good faith or attempt to confer in good faith to
resolve discovery disputes before involving the Court. A motion to compel discovery, moreover,
must include a statement saying that the parties first attempted to resolve the discovery dispute on
1

their own. (ECF No. 27). Failure to do so may result in the Court denying the motion to compel
for failure to comply with the Court’s scheduling order and the Local Rules.
Finally, upon initial review of Plaintiff’s Motion, it appears that Defendant may have sent
Plaintiff materials related to a different case. Defendant is encouraged to review his file to
determine whether he has mailed Plaintiff the necessary disclosures related to this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 6th day of June 2024.

/s/ Christy Comstock
CHRISTY COMSTOCK
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2