Mann et al v. Donald et al
Filing
110
ORDER denying 107 Motion for Depositiion by Remote Means. Ordered by Judge Hugh Lawson on 5/17/2011. (nbp)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
VALDOSTA DIVISION
PIP HENG, RONNY N. ASKEW,
MICHAEL A. WALKER, and GEORGE C.
HASKELL JR.,
Civil Action 7:08-CV-5 (HL)
Plaintiffs,
v.
LIEUTENANT SHERMAN MAINE,
OFFICER JAMIE POWERS, OFFICER
JESSE HOWELL, OFFICER TERRY
BROWN, OFFICER ANDRE YANCEY,
OFFICER JOSEPH SCHNAKE, OFFICER
RODNEY SMITH, OFFICER WILLIE
RATLIFF, and LIEUTENANT DOUGLASS
RIDALL,
Defendants.
ORDER
This memorializes the orders issued during the telephone conference held on
May 17, 2011 with regard to Plaintiff Askew’s Motion for Deposition by Remote Means
(Doc. 107).
The Motion for Deposition is denied. The Court finds that the Defendants are
entitled to see Plaintiff Askew as he gives his deposition. Therefore, Plaintiff Askew
may either return to the Middle District of Georgia to give his deposition on May 19, or
he can appear at the conference facility in Germany, where his deposition will be
broadcast to Atlanta via video. The parties are ordered to split the cost of renting the
conference facilities. If Plaintiff Askew fails to appear for his deposition on May 19
either in person or at the conference facility, or fails to pay for his portion of the rental
fee, his complaint will be dismissed. The Attorney General’s office will pay for the court
reporter, who will be present in Germany with Plaintiff Askew.
SO ORDERED, this the 17 th day of May, 2011.
s/ Hugh Lawson
HUGH LAWSON, SENIOR JUDGE
mbh
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?