Lebron v. Murphy et al

Filing 55

ORDER denying 52 Motion to Compel; denying 53 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Judge Holly B. Fitzsimmons on 3/9/10. (Milligan, C.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

LUIS ANGEL LEBRON v. B. MURPHY, et al.

: : : : :

Case No. 3:06cv1849(WWE)(HBF)

RULING AND ORDER Plaintiff has filed two motions, a Motion Compelling Discovery, Sanctions and Default and a Motion for Appointment of Counsel. Plaintiff's discovery motion was filed in July 2009. He

states that the defendants have not provided any of his requested discovery. The defendants filed their response to the motion to They state that they have complied

compel in February 2010.1

with many of the discovery requests and have engaged in some settlement negotiations. The defendants contend that the

remaining outstanding requests are overbroad and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. They ask the

court to schedule a telephone conference to resolve the remaining discovery issues and explore the possibility of settlement. It appears from the letters submitted by the defendants that

The defendants do not explain why the failed to respond to the motion for over six months.

1

some progress has been made in resolving the discovery issues. For that reason, plaintiff's motion to compel, imposition of sanctions and entry of default judgment is denied. progress, however, has been painfully slow. That

To resolve the

remaining discovery issues and prepare this case for trial, the court will schedule a telephonic status conference. The parties

shall be prepared to discuss any remaining discovery issues and set a firm schedule to move this case to trial. In addition, the

parties shall be prepared to discuss the possibility of settlement. In his second motion, plaintiff seeks appointment of pro bono counsel. He states that appointment is necessary because

inmates are not allowed to view personal information regarding correctional officers and that "a lot of personal information and documents" will be required to prosecute this case. 2. Doc. #53 at

He also requests counsel to resolve the outstanding discovery The court will address the outstanding discovery issues Thus, appointment of counsel is not

issues.

at the telephone conference. required at this time.

If the court finds that access to

restricted information is necessary to prosecute this case, plaintiff may renew his request for appointment of counsel during the telephone conference. In conclusion, plaintiff's Motion Compelling Discovery, Sanctions and Default [doc. #52] and Motion for Appointment of

2

Counsel [doc. #53] are DENIED without prejudice. request for a telephone conference is granted.

The defendants'

The parties will

be notified once the conference has been scheduled. SO ORDERED. Entered this 9th day of March 2010, at Bridgeport, Connecticut. ____/s/_____________ HOLLY B. FITZSIMMONS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3