Dishmond v. United States Of America

Filing 37

ORDER denying Plaintiff's 35 Motion to Administratively Close Case Without Prejudice. Plaintiff shall comply with all existing deadlines outlined in this Court's March 5, 2015 34 Order. Signed by Judge J. Randal Hall on 04/01/2015. (jah)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
AUGUSTA DIVISION

MICHAEL DISHMOND,

individually

and as the administrator

*
*

of the estate of Teresa

*

Dishmond,

*

deceased,

*

Plaintiff,

*

v.

*

CV

114-083

*

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

*

Defendant.

*

ORDER

Before

the

Court

is

Plaintiff's

Close Case Without Prejudice.

Court

granted Plaintiff

Motion

(Doc. 35.)

was

unable

Lawrence Hurley.

to

This

locate

(Docs. 31 & 34.)

On October 9, 2014, this

Ms.

Lee

Plaintiff, despite diligent
or

her

business

partner,

Court then granted two extensions of the

limited discovery period,

days.

Administratively

a ninety-day limited discovery period to

address Laura Lee's employment 'status.
efforts,

to

one for sixty days and one

for thirty

After the latter thirty-day extension, the

Court warned the parties that no further extensions on the limited
discovery period would be granted.

With the present motion,

Plaintiff represents that he cannot

adequately respond to the Government's dispositive motions without
the testimony of Ms.

Lee and possibly Mr.

Hurley.

According to

Plaintiff,

"disposing

testimony

of

these

plaintiff."

(Doc.

of

this

witnesses
35 at

without

would

4-5.)

that he would reopen this

their depositions,

case

be

of time,

benefit

manifestly

If granted,

of

the

unjust

to

the

Plaintiff represents

case upon locating the witnesses,

and either respond to the

motions or dismiss the case with prejudice.
the motion,

the

take

Government's pending

The Government opposes

responding that it "would be prejudiced by the passage

fading memories of witnesses,

and by not being afforded

timely adjudication of a Rule 12 motion to dismiss and dispositive
summary judgment motion."

While

cognizant

of

(Doc.

the

36.)

hardship

faced by

Plaintiff

diligence in attempting to locate these witnesses,
closing

the

limited

case

discovery

Accordingly,

(doc.

35)

is

would

result

period,

Plaintiff's

DENIED.

in

an

which

Motion

Plaintiff

indefinite

the

to

will

shall

comply

Georgia,

with

2015 Order

this

/

all
(doc.

DISTRICT

DISTRICT

the

grant.

Close

Case

existing
34).

day of April,

2015.

TATES

of

not

Administratively

deadlines outlined in this Court's March 5,

ORDER ENTERED at Augusta,

administratively
extension

Court

and his

JUDGE

OF GEORGIA