Sneed v. Wheeler Correctional Facility et al

Filing 20

ORDER denying 16 Motion to proceed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 4/22/15. (cmr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
DUBLIN DIVISION
JAMES SNEED,
Plaintiff,
v.
WHEELER CORRECTIONAL
FACILITY, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
_________

CV 314-085

ORDER
_________
Before the Court is pro se Plaintiff’s “motion to proceed” in which he requests
information on where to send his interrogatories and information on the rules of the Court. (Doc.
no. 16.) As Defendants in this case have yet to be served, any discovery such as interrogatories
by Plaintiff is improper at this time. See Loc. R. 26.1. In addition, the Court has already given
Plaintiff some instructions on how to proceed with his case but cannot “serve as de facto counsel
for a party. . . .” In re Unsolicited Letters to Federal Judges, 120 F. Supp. 2d 1073, 1074 (S.D.
Ga. 2000) (citation omitted). Thus, Plaintiff’s request for the Court to advise him on the rules for
this District is improper. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s “motion to proceed.”
(Doc. no. 16.)
SO ORDERED this 22nd day of April, 2015, at Augusta, Georgia.