Thompson v. Hall et al

Filing 17

ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE. Plaintiff shall effect proper service on the Defendant and file proof of service with the Court immediately thereafter. Signed by Judge Ursula Ungaro on 9/12/08. (tp)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-22378-CIV-UNGARO JOHN B. THOMPSON, Plaintiff, v. TOM HALL et al., Defendants. / ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff's Motion to Expedite Proceedings with a "Speedy Hearing," filed on September 11, 2008 (D.E. 13). THE COURT has considered the Motion and the pertinent portions of the record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. Plaintiff has filed a notice stating that Defendants were served on September 9, 2008. (D.E. 16.) However, no executed proof of service has been filed with the Court. Further, after making inquiry of the Attorney General's office with respect to whether it is representing Defendant in this action, the Court's staff was informed by representatives of the Attorney General's office on September 10, 2008, that no attorney had been assigned to this case as of that date. The Court infers from that response that no decision has been made whether the Attorney General will accept service by mail on behalf of the Defendant. The Court does not perceive that ex parte consideration of Plaintiff's motion is appropriate and, therefore, cannot properly consider Plaintiff's Motion to Expedite without a response from Defendants. It further appears that the Defendant may not respond without proper service having been made. Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff SHALL effect proper service on the Defendant and file proof of service with the Court immediately thereafter. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 12th day of September, 2008 URSULA UNGARO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE copies provided: counsel of record 2

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?