Gully v. Trice et al

Filing 80

ORDER DENYING IN PART and SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE IN PART re 79 "MOTION to Object" filed by Ronnie Gully, Jr.: As explained in the attached Order, the Court partially denies as untimely filed and partially directs defense counsel to respond to Plaintiff Gully's appeal from Magistrate Judge Williams' ruling/orders. See Order for details. (Set Deadline as to 79 MOTION to Object -- Defense counsel shall file response by April 1, 2016.) Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Reagan on 3/11/16. (soh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
RONNIE GULLY, JR.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
THOMAS TRICE, and
PHILLIP McLAURIN,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 15-CV-0159-MJR-SCW

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’s MARCH 11, 2016
APPEAL FROM MAGISTRATE JUDGE WILLIAMS’ RULINGS
REAGAN, Chief Judge:
By Order of March 5, 2015 (Doc. 18), this prisoner civil rights case was referred to
the Honorable Stephen C. Williams, United States Magistrate Judge, for pretrial
proceedings, in accord with 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 72.1(a) of this Court. On
March 11, 2016, Plaintiff Gully filed a "Motion to Object" (Doc. 79) which challenges
multiple rulings by Magistrate Judge Williams. Gully has not listed the challenged
rulings by docket number. He identifies them as (a) Judge Williams' denial of motions
for appointment of counsel, (b) Judge Williams' denial of Gully's request to compel
"discovery of tangible things," he says he filed January 22, 2016, and (c) Judge Williams'
denial as moot of a motion seeking a decision on a pending summary judgment motion.
As to (a), Judge Williams entered three Orders denying motions for recruitment
of counsel -- Doc. 68 (on 9/30/15), Doc. 70 (on 10/6/15), and Doc. 75 (on 1/6/16). As to
1|Page

(b), the docket sheet does not reveal a motion for discovery of tangible things
referenced by Gully as having been filed on 1/22/16. Gully did file several motions to
compel in 2015, which were denied by Judge Williams on 7/20/15, 7/24/15, and
10/2/15. As to (c), it appears that Gully challenges Judge Williams' February 29, 2016
Order at Doc. 78.
28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 73.1 of this Court allow an appeal from a
Magistrate Judge's order on a nondispositive matter within 14 days of the challenged
ruling. That time limit has expired as to anything Gully complains about EXCEPT
Judge Williams' 2/29/16 Order (Doc. 78). The most recent Judge Williams' ruling prior
to Doc. 78 was entered on January 6, 2016. March 11, 2016 is clearly too late to take an
appeal from a January 2016 ruling or any 2015 Orders entered by Judge Williams.
Accordingly, the Court DENIES as untimely Gully's March 11, 2016 "Motion to
Object" (Doc. 79), to the extent it seeks to appeal to the undersigned from any Judge
Williams’ ruling prior to February 2016 (including Orders on motions for recruitment of
counsel and motions to compel). The Court ORDERS Defendants to respond to the
appeal (Doc. 79), to the extent it challenges Judge Williams’ February 29, 2016 Order at
Doc. 78. Defendants shall respond to Doc. 79 by April 1, 2016.
Finally, as to Gully’s general protests about the quick issuance of, brevity of, or
“injustice” in Judge Williams’ rulings, Gully must tie these broad-based complaints to
specific rulings made by Judge Williams if he wishes to appeal them to the undersigned
District Judge. Gully has not done so here.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
2|Page

DATED March 11, 2016.
s/ Michael J. Reagan
Michael J. Reagan
United States District Judge

3|Page