Clark v. Sheffield et al

Filing 40

ORDER for Defendants Sheffield and Barrentine to file substantive responses to Plaintiff's 32 MOTION to Compel and attach their relevant interrogatory and request responses within 7 days of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 03/07/2018. (jlh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
DUBLIN DIVISION
ARTHUR LAWTON CLARK,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
LYNN SHEFFIELD, Sheriff; LT. TOMMY )
BARRENTINE; and DR. PETER WROBEL, )
)
Defendants.
)
_________

CV 317-025

ORDER
_________
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel.

(Doc. no. 32.)

Although

Defendants correctly state Plaintiff’s motion does not comply with Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 37 or Local Rule 26.5, for the sake of judicial efficiency, the Court will address
Plaintiff’s claims on the merits. Defendant Wrobel has filed a substantive response and
attached his relevant interrogatory and request responses.

(Doc. no. 37.)

However,

Defendants Sheffield and Barrentine have not. (Doc. no. 35.) Accordingly, the Court
ORDERS Defendants Sheffield and Barrentine to file a substantive response and to attach
their relevant interrogatory and request responses within seven days of this Order.
SO ORDERED this 7th day of March, 2018, at Augusta, Georgia.