Handy v. Cummings et al

Filing 94

ORDER Defendants' Motion for Entry of Protective Order by All Defendants Except Dep. Morrison 90 is Granted in Part. Plaintiff's initial discovery composed of approximately 24 interrogatories per each defendant is STRICKEN and Defendants shall not be required to respond. the Scheduling Order in this matter is amended to allow the Plaintiff to serve a total of fifty interrogatories, to be divided among the defendants or not in whatever manner Plaintiff sees fit. No other discovery limitation will be changed or affected by this Order by Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 08/08/11.(jjh, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya
Civil Action No. 11–cv–00581–WYD–KMT

WYATT T. HANDY JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
SGT. CUMMINGS, individual & official capacity,
DEP. WENDELBURG, individually,
DEP. THAO, individually,
DEP. LIGON, individually,
DEP. ELLEDGE, individually,
DEP. GIRRARD, individually,
MRS. GRETCHEN, individually,
WOOD, individually,
MRS. MOLLENDOR, individually,
DEP. LITWILER, individually,
NANCY, individual & official capacity,
DEP. MORRISON, individual,
DEP. KRAUS, individual,
DEP GALLEGOS, individual,
DEP. HUNT, individual,
SGT. CLARK, individual & official capacity,
SGT. DOIZAKI, individual & official capacity,
DEP. EMERSON, individual,
DEP KLEINHEKSEL, individual,
SHERIFF GRAYSON ROBINSON, individual & official capacity,
CAPT. SAUTER, individual & official capacity,
LT. WHITIKER, individual & official capacity,
SGT. RANKIN, individual & official capacity,
DEP. FREEMAN, individual,
DEP. LONGFELLOW, individual, and
DEP. HAMM, individual,

Defendants.

ORDER

This matter is before the court on Defendants’ “Motion for Entry of Protective Order by
All Defendants Except Dep. Morrison” [Doc. No. 90]. Defendants seek relief from three
hundred thirty-four interrogatories propounded to the individual defendants by Plaintiff.
This court’s discovery order states, “Each side shall be limited to twenty-five (25)
Interrogatories, including subparts. . . .Each side shall be limited to twenty-five (25) Requests for
Production of Documents. . . . Each side shall be limited to twenty-five (25) Requests for
Admissions.” On one side of the case is the plaintiff, Wyatt Handy. On the other side of the
case are the fifteen defendants named by Plaintiff who have been served. The court’s order
anticipated a maximum of fifty interrogatories, requests for production of documents and
requests for admission being exchanged between and among both sides to the controversy
Wherefore, it is ORDERED
Defendants’ “Motion for Entry of Protective Order by All Defendants Except Dep.
Morrison” [Doc. No. 90] is GRANTED in part. Plaintiff’s initial discovery composed of
approximately 24 interrogatories per each defendant is STRICKEN and Defendants shall not be
required to respond.
It is further ORDERED
Plaintiff may serve interrogatories again, however they must be re-drafted to comply with
the court’s numerical limitations pertaining to his side. In light of the court’s review of the now
2

stricken voluminous interrogatories originally propounded by Plaintiff, the court has determined
that the Plaintiff is capable of formulating cogent and relevant interrogatories. Therefore, the
Scheduling Order in this matter is amended to allow the Plaintiff to serve a total of fifty
interrogatories, to be divided among the defendants – or not – in whatever manner Plaintiff sees
fit. No other discovery limitation will be changed or affected by this Order.
Dated this 8th day of August, 2011.

3