Carter v. Coody et al

Filing 48

RULING denying 45 Pltfs Motion to Compel Discovery. Pltf is placed on notice that he must serve all discovery motions on counsel for the defts, not the Attorney General. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Riedlinger on 2/10/2009. (JDL, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

LEONARD CARTER (#133032) VERSUS SHIRLEY COODY, ET AL CIVIL ACTION NUMBER 07-444-RET-SCR

RULING ON MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY Before the court is the plaintiff's Motion for an Order Compelling Discovery. has been filed. On October 22, 2007, the plaintiff propounded interrogatories, requests for admissions and a request for the production of documents.1 Although the defendants have apparently not responded Record document number 45. No opposition

to the plaintiff's discovery requests, and did not file any response to this motion, the motion cannot be granted. A review of the certificate of service showed that the discovery requests were served on former Attorney General Charles Foti rather than Susan Shuey, who was counsel of record for the defendants when the discovery requests were served.2 Similarly,

the plaintiff sent a letter regarding the outstanding discovery responses and his second motion to compel discovery to Attorney

1

Record document numbers 22-24.

On February 10, 2009, the defendants' Motion to Withdraw, Substitute, and Enroll Counsel of Record to substitute Douglas G. Swenson as counsel of record was granted. Record document number 47.

2

General James Caldwell rather than counsel of record. Accordingly, the plaintiff's motion to compel discovery is denied. Plaintiff is placed on notice that he must serve all

discovery and motions on counsel of record for the defendants, not the Attorney General. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, February 10, 2009.

STEPHEN C. RIEDLINGER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2