WRIGHT v. YOUNG, et al
Filing
77
ORDER: Clerk must issue two subpoenas and mail to Plaintiff. Plaintiff must complete and serve subpoenas as directed in this order. That portion of the Court's 75 Order, that stated USMS would be responsible for service of non-party subpoenas is VACATED. Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE GARY R JONES on 2/26/2013. (jws)(Subpoenas issued and sent as directed)
Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
HARRY MICHAEL WRIGHT,
Plaintiff,
v.
CASE NO. 4:10-cv-474-SPM-GRJ
MORRIS YOUNG, et al.,
Defendants.
_____________________________/
ORDER
On January 30, 2013, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to issue subpoenas to
non-parties Florida Sheriff’s Self-Insurance Fund, and the Board of County
Commissioners of Gadsden County. Plaintiff has provided a street address for
personal service for the Florida Sheriff’s Self-Insurance Fund in response to the Court’s
Order. (Docs. 75, 76.) This Order sets out the procedure by which the subpoenas shall
be served.
In the Court’s prior Order, Doc. 75, the Court indicated that the subpoenas would
be served by the United States Marshals Service (“USMS”). However, the Court has
noted in its prior orders related to Plaintiff’s requests for subpoenas that “because
[Plaintiff] has paid the filing fee and is not proceeding in forma pauperis, he will be
required to pay the costs of serving any subpoenas.” (Doc. 41, at 3.) Accordingly, the
Court finds it appropriate to vacate its prior order indicating that service would be
effectuated by the USMS.
As an initial matter, the Clerk is directed to issue two subpoenas, for the Florida
Sheriff’s Self-Insurance Fund and the Board of County Commissioners of Gadsden
Page 2 of 3
County. The Clerk must mail the two subpoenas, “signed but otherwise in blank,” to
Plaintiff for him to complete. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(a)(3). In completing the
subpoenas, Plaintiff’s attention is directed to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
45(a)(1)(A), which requires a subpoena to specify the time and place where the
responding parties are to produce the required documents. If Plaintiff wishes the
responding parties to mail him copies of the documents, he should specify the address
to which the documents are to be mailed. Plaintiff must also include with each
subpoena a complete detailed list of the documents that he wishes the responding
party to produce. Plaintiff should note that he will be responsible for paying copying
costs for these documents, and that the responding parties may require that he pay the
copying costs in advance of production.
After completing the subpoena forms, Plaintiff will be responsible for serving the
subpoenas in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(b). That rule
requires a subpoena to be served by a person “who is at least 18 years old and not a
party.” Plaintiff may hire a process server to serve the subpoenas at his own expense.
Plaintiff should note that he may be required to prove that service was properly made;
this “requires filing with the issuing court a statement showing the date and manner of
service and the names of the persons served. The statement must be certified by the
server.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(b)(4).
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:
1) The Clerk must issue two subpoenas and mail them to Plaintiff.
2) Plaintiff must complete the subpoenas as directed in this order, and must
cause the subpoenas to be served on the Florida Sheriff’s Self-Insurance Fund
Case No: 4:10-cv-474-SPM-GRJ
Page 3 of 3
and the Board of County Commissioners for Gadsden County. Plaintiff is
responsible for the costs of service.
3) That portion of the Court’s Order, Doc. 75, that stated that the United States
Marshals Service would be responsible for service of the non-party subpoenas is
VACATED.
DONE AND ORDERED this 26th day of February 2013.
s/Gary R. Jones
GARY R. JONES
United States Magistrate Judge
Case No: 4:10-cv-474-SPM-GRJ
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?