Love v. Memorial Health

Filing 28

ORDER denying 9 Motion for Subpoena ; denying 10 Motion for Subpoena ; denying 11 Motion for Subpoena ; denying 19 Motion to Subpoena ; denying as Moot 25 Motion to Subpoena ; denying 27 Motion to Waive Witness Fee. Signed by Magistrate Judge G. R. Smith on 12/6/2013. (loh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
KEISHYA LATRISE LOVE,
Plaintiff,
Case No. CV413-112

V.

MEMORIAL HEALTH UNIVERSITY
MEDICAL CENTER, INC.,
Defendants.

Plaintiff Keishya Latrise Love has filed several motions asking the
Court "to subpoena" defendant and its employees. (Docs. 9, 10, 11, &
19.) Defendant correctly notes that plaintiffs attempt to obtain
discovery was premature' and, further, that traditional discovery
vehicles would be the preferred method for obtaining any information
she seeks from a party-opponent. (Doc. 22.) As plaintiff has shown no
legitimate purpose for the requested subpoenas, the Court declines to
issue them,. Her motions "to subpoena" defendant and its employees are
DENIED.
Under Rule 26(0, plaintiff is under a duty to confer with opposing counsel to
develop a plan of discovery and must do so before seeking discovery from any
source. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d), (f).
1

Love may seek information needed to prosecute her claim by
properly serving defendant with interrogatories and requests for the
production of documents. Fed. R. Civ. P. 33, 342 Through
interrogatories, plaintiff can require defendant to answer her written
questions seeking information about any matter that is relevant to any
party's claim or defense, including the existence and location of
documents and the names of any witnesses who have knowledge of the
facts. Fed R. Civ. P. 26(f). Through a request to produce, plaintiff can
direct defendant to produce documents, electronically stored
information, or tangible things relevant to her claim or the defense. 3 It
is true that plaintiff may notice the deposition of the corporate
defendant (without use of a subpoena) under Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6),
though she must describe "with reasonable particularity the matters for

Interrogatories and requests for production may be served only on a party to
the litigation. Absent leave of Court, plaintiff may serve "no more than 25 written
interrogatories, including all discrete subparts," upon defendant. Fed. R. Civ. P.
33(a)(1).
2

The request must set forth the items to be inspected either by individual
item or by category, and describe each item and category with reasonable
particularity. Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(1). The request should specify a reasonable time
and place (such as defendant's place of business) for making the inspection. Id.
2

examination."

Id. But because the party noticing a deposition must

bear the costs of recording that deposition (which generally requires the
use of a stenographer), Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(3), plaintiff may find that
the written discovery mechanisms provided by Rules 33 and 34 are
better suited to her pocketbook.
Love also moves to subpoena Tabitha Evonne Thomas Hendry, a
non-party. (Doc. 25.) Defendant opposes the request, but it is
questionable whether it has standing to do so. (Doe. 26.) In any event,
Love need not pester the Court with requests for subpoenas needed to
secure documents or testimony from a non-party. She may simply
approach the Clerk and ask for them. Since there was no need for her
to request the subpoenas via motion, her motion for a subpoena (doe.
25) is DENIED as moot.
She is advised, however, that while she is generally entitled to
have the Clerk of the Court issue a subpoena needed to secure
documents or testimony from a non-party, she may incur significant
expense in employing it. If she uses a subpoena to command a nonparty witness' appearance, she will be required to pay the witness' fees
3

and mileage as allowed by law, unless the fees are waived. Fed. R. Civ.
P. 45(b)(1). Additionally, she may incur the costs of a process server.

Id. She is not entitled to public funds for these expenses. Even pro se
litigants must bear their own litigation expenses. While the in forma

pa uperis statute provides access to the court to an indigent litigant by
permitting the waiver of prepayment of fees and costs, see 28 U.S.C. §
1915(a), no provision of that statute "authorizes courts to commit
federal monies for payment of the necessary expenses in a civil suit
brought by an indigent litigant."

Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147, 158-59

(3d Cir. 1993); Doye v. Colvin, 2009 WL 764980 at * 1 (S.D. Ga. Mar. 23,
2009) (same). Hence, her request that the Court offset her expenses in
"recording of [a] witness" (doe. 27) is DENIED.
Another matter has come to the Court's attention. Elizabeth
Parker is still listed as a defendant in this action. She was the Nurse
Manager who took steps to fire Love. (Doc. 1.) Employment
discrimination suits, however, are only permitted against a plaintiffs
employer, not against supervisors in their individual capacity.

Busby v.

City of Orlando, 931 F.2d 764, 772 (11th Cir. 1991) ("relief granted
In

under Title VII is against the employer, not individual employees whose
actions would constitute a violation of the Act."). The complaint itself
only names Memorial Health as a defendant, so the Court presumes
that that the Clerk mistakenly added Parker. Accordingly, the Clerk is
DIRECTED to strike her name from the caption of this case.
Finally, Love has repeatedly attempted to obtain Court
intervention without properly captioning her filings, which has led the
Clerk to file them as letters to the Court.

(See docs. 4, 5, 13, 14, 20, &

23.) Letters seeking judicial relief are not welcome or appropriate. The
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure specifically provide that "[a] request
for a court order must be made by written motion." Fed. R. Civ. P.
7(b)(1) (emphasis added); see In re Unsolicited Letters to Federal

Judges, 120 F. Supp. 2d 1073 (S.D. Ga. 2000); see also Ga. Ct. App. R.
27(b) ("Parties are not permitted to file letter briefs nor letter cites").
Should Love wish to re-file any of those requests in the form of a
properly-captioned motion, 4 properly captioned in the style of this case,

The proper "caption" of this case is set forth on the first page of this Order.
In addition to setting out the names of the parties and the case number, plaintiff
should specifically label her filing as a "motion."
5
4

she should do so; otherwise they will be ignored.
SO ORDERED this

day of December, 2013.

UNITE1I SATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTH
DISTRICT OF GEORGIA