Savannah v. Collins et al
MINUTE ORDER denying 60 Defendants Knab and Collins' Motion to Continue Stay of All Proceedings Pending Interlocutory Appeal and for Protective Order Concerning Plaintiff's Discovery Requests to Defendants, by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe on 7/9/2013.(mjwcd)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 12-cv-02403-RBJ-MJW
ERNIE J. SAVANNAH,
BILL COLLINS and
Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe
It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants Knab and Collins’ Motion to Continue
Stay of All Proceedings Pending Interlocutory Appeal and for Protective Order
Concerning Plaintiff’s Discovery Requests to Defendants (docket no. 60) is DENIED in
its entirely for the following reasons. The parties may proceed with discovery consistent
with the Rule 16 Scheduling Order dated February 14, 2013 (docket no. 36).
On March 18, 2013, Magistrate Judge Watanabe issued a written
Recommendation on the Motion to Dismiss Complaint from Fort Collins Police Officer
Bill Collins (docket no. 46). In this Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Watanabe
recommended that such motion be granted. This Recommendation was rejected by
District Judge R. Brooke Jackson and accordingly the Motion to Dismiss Complaint from
Fort Collins Police Officer Bill Collins (docket no. 46) was DENIED. See Judge
Jackson’s Order dated May 28, 2013 (docket no. 50).
On June 11, 2013, Defendant Officer Collins’ filed a Notice of Appeal of Judge
Jackson’s Order (docket no. 50) to the Tenth Circuit. Based upon this interlocutory
appeal, Defendant Officer Collins now seeks a stay of all proceedings and also a
protective order arguing that a final decision on the qualified immunity issue should be
made by the Tenth Circuit before this court should allow discovery. This court
disagrees. A thoughtful and thorough decision was made by Judge Jackson on the
qualified immunity issue and it is law of the case as of the date of this minute order.
See docket no. 50. Defendant Officer Collins assumes that Judge Jackson’s decision
on qualified immunity will be reversed on appeal. This court will not make that
assumption. This court has discretion to stay discovery or not. See Koch v. Koch
Industries, Inc., 203 F.3d 1202, 1238 (10th Cir. 2000); Motley v. Marathon Oil Co., 71
F.3d 1547, 1550 (10th Cir. 1995). In this case and in this court’s sound discretion,
discovery should not be stayed.
Date: July 9, 2013
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?