Adams v. Howe et al

Filing 62

ORDER Overruling 59 Plaintiff's Objections to 58 Order on Motion to Compel, Order on Motion for Leave to File, Order on Motion to Extend - Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (DTof)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
STEPHANALE ADAMS,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case Number 10-13529
Honorable David M. Lawson
Magistrate Judge Laurie J. Michelson

DENNIS HOWE, SCOTT BICKEL,
and TERRI JOHNSON-WISE,
Defendants.
______________________________________/
ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS TO
MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S DISCOVERY ORDER
Plaintiff Stephanale Adams is an inmate in the custody of the Michigan Department of
corrections who has filed a complaint pro se alleging various violations of her civil rights. The
Court referred the case to Magistrate judge Laurie J. Michelson for pretrial management. On July
9, 2012, Judge Michelson entered an order on various discovery motions [dkt. # 58], to which the
plaintiff objected.
The district court reviews an order by a magistrate judge on a non-dispositive matter to
determine whether the decision is “clearly erroneous.” United States v. Curtis, 237 F.3d 598, 603
(6th Cir. 2001). A decision is “clearly erroneous” if “although there is evidence to support it, the
reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has
been committed.” United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948). Where
there are two plausible views, a decision cannot be “clearly erroneous.” Anderson v. City of
Bessemer City, North Carolina, 470 U.S. 564, 574 (1985).

The Court has reviewed the motion papers and the magistrate judge’s order and finds that
the decision falls within the range of principled outcomes allowed b y the facts and the applicable
law.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the plaintiff’s objections [dkt . #59] are OVERRULED.
s/David M. Lawson
DAVID M. LAWSON
United States District Judge

Dated: August 2, 2012

PROOF OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served
upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first
class U.S. mail on August 2, 2012.
s/Deborah R. Tofil
DEBORAH R. TOFIL

-2-