Gregg v. IBEW et al

Filing 177

ORDER DENYING 164 Motion for Protective Order and to Strike Pla's Third Set of Interrogatories by Local 305 IBEW; DENYING 166 Motion for Protective Order and to Strike Pla's Third Set of Interrogatories by John Nesbitt, Dave Lovitt, For t Wayne Electrical Joint Apprenticeship Training Committee Inc; Dfts to respond w/in 30 days to Pla's Third Set of Interrogatories. All further disc w/respect to all Dfts other than National Electrical Contractors Association is STAYED. Pla will have 10 days after receiving Dfts' responses to Third Set of Interrogatories to file Motion to Compel w/respect to his first, second, or third set of interrogatories. Pla's 171 Motion for Modification of Schedule is DENIED. Pla's 173 Motion to Compel is DENIED. Pla's 172 Motion to Admonish/Sanction is DENIED. Pla's oral request at the hearing for a free transcript of the proceeding is DENIED.Signed by Magistrate Judge Roger B Cosbey on 11/9/2009.(lns)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES FEDERAL COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA FORT WAYNE DIVISION KEVIN M. GREGG, Plaintiff, v. LOCAL 305 IBEW, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Cause No.: 1:08-CV-00160 ORDER Before the Court are the following motions: (1) two motions for a protective order and to strike pro se Plaintiff Kevin Gregg's third set of interrogatories, one filed by Defendant IBEW Local Union No. 305 (Docket # 164) and the other filed by Defendants Fort Wayne Joint Apprenticeship Training Committee, John Nesbitt, and Dave Lovitt (Docket # 166); (2) Gregg's motion to modify the schedule (Docket # 171); (3) Gregg's motion to compel a mediation schedule (Docket # 173); and (4) Gregg's motion to sanction Defendants' counsel (Docket # 172). A hearing was conducted on the motions on November 9, 2009, and oral argument was heard. (Docket # 176.) For the reasons stated on the record, the Court issued the following rulings: 1. Defendants' motions for protective order and to strike Gregg's third set of interrogatories (Docket # 164, 166) are each DENIED. Gregg has demonstrated good cause or excusable neglect for an extension with respect to this discovery, and he may be prejudiced if this discovery is denied. Defendants are to respond within thirty days to Gregg's third set of interrogatories; however, all further discovery with respect to all Defendants other than National Electrical Contractors Association ("NECA") is STAYED. Gregg will have ten days after receiving Defendants' responses to his third set of interrogatories to file a motion to compel with respect to his first, second, or third set of interrogatories. If no motion to compel is filed within the ten days, Gregg will have waived any claim that the interrogatories are not responsive. 2. Gregg's motion to modify the schedule (Docket # 171) is DENIED. The Court will set further discovery deadlines, if necessary, after the Court rules on NECA's motion to dismiss (Docket # 131). 3. Gregg's motion to compel the mediation schedule (Docket # 173) is DENIED. Any effort to schedule mediation is premature until the Court rules on NECA's motion to dismiss (Docket # 131). 4. Gregg's motion for sanctions (Docket # 172) is DENIED, as there is no basis upon which to sanction Defendants' counsel in this case. 5. In addition, Gregg's oral request at the hearing for a free transcript of the proceeding (in actuality, a transcript at the public's expense) is DENIED. "A pro se civil Plaintiff, proceeding in forma pauperis, is not entitled by law to any transcripts free of charge." Kot v. Hackett, Civ. A. Nos. 92-5120, 91-3509, 1993 WL 432431, at *1 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 20, 1993). Rather, such a plaintiff is entitled to a free transcript only if he is attempting to appeal a final decision of the Court and proves that "a substantial question" would be raised by the appeal. Id. (citing 28 U.S.C. § 753(f)). Those circumstances do not apply at this juncture. SO ORDERED. Entered this 9th day of November, 2009. /S/ Roger B. Cosbey Roger B. Cosbey, United States Magistrate Judge 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?