Sheets v. Presseller et al

Filing 93

ORDER denying without prejudice 89 Sheets' Motion for discovery sanctions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kyle C. Dudek on 1/6/2025. (CGW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
ANDREW BRYANT SHEETS,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 2:24-CV-495-JLB-KCD

v.
JERRY PRESSELLER, IN THEIR
INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY; OFFICER DAVID
JOSEPH LIPKER, IN THEIR
INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY; CITY OF PUNTA
GORDA, IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL
AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; AND
PUNTA GORDA DOWNTOWN
MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION,
INC.,
Defendants,
/

ORDER
Plaintiff Andrew Sheets sues under the First Amendment to challenge
his trespass from a local farmers market. (Doc. 18.) According to Sheets, he
had an irrevocable right to conduct “journalistic activities” on the public
property where the farmers market was held. (Id. ¶ 21.)
Sheets is unhappy with Defendant Jerry Presseller’s discovery
responses. According to Sheets, Presseller “made materially false and
misleading statements regarding his actions and involvement in Plaintiff’s
repeated trespassing and interference with his constitutionally protected

First Amendment activities[.]” (Doc. 89 at 1.) Presseller’s discovery responses
are apparently “contradicted by video evidence and . . . recorded statements.”
(Id.) Sheets thus seeks discovery sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, including
an adverse inference against Presseller and referral “for a potential perjury
investigation.” (Id. at 2.)
The Court will not impose sanctions at this time. Sheets is contesting
the veracity of Presseller’s version of events. But what led to Sheets’ trespass
is highly disputed and must be resolved by the fact-finder, not this Court
through the guise of discovery sanctions. Sheets, of course, is free to present
evidence that undermines Presseller’s credibility and disproves his version of
events. The Court cannot, however, put its thumb on the scale and decide the
truth at this stage. See, e.g., Qiu v. Bd. of Educ. of Scott Cnty., Kentucky, No.
521CV00197GFVTEBA, 2022 WL 18587705, at *6 (E.D. Ky. Nov. 9, 2022)
(“The way to challenge Defendant's evidence, however, is not by filing
accusatory and baseless motions into this Court's record. Such motion
practice is not appropriate. Instead, a party should seek additional discovery
that support her claims or refute claims asserted by the opposing party.”).
Accordingly, Sheets’ motion for discovery sanctions (Doc. 89) is
DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

2

ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on January 6, 2025.

3