Robinson v. Tansel
Filing
36
ORDER GRANTING 35 Motion to Take Deposition from Michael Robinson --Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
MICHAEL ROBINSON,
Plaintiff
v.
Case No. 2:16-CV-10135
District Judge George Caram Steeh
Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti
NICOLE TANSEL,
Defendant.
___________________________________/
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO CONDUCT
DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF (DE 35)
Pending is Defendant’s April 19, 2017 motion to conduct deposition of
Plaintiff, who is proceeding in pro per. (DE 35.) Permission of the Court to take
the deposition is required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(a)(2)(B), because Plaintiff is
incarcerated.1
Upon consideration, Defendant’s motion to conduct deposition of Plaintiff
(DE 35) is GRANTED. Defendants shall be permitted to take the deposition of the
Plaintiff for all purposes allowed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Said
deposition may occur either in person, by telephone, or via video teleconference, at
1
At the time he filed this lawsuit on January 14, 2016, Plaintiff was incarcerated at
the MDOC’s Woodland Center Correctional Facility. (DE 1 at 47, #515217.)
According to OTIS, Plaintiff was paroled on August 2, 2016. See
www.michigan.gov/corrections, “Offender Search.” However, Plaintiff’s current
address of record is 824 Jackson Ave., Yazoo City, MS 39194 (DE 33), and the
instant motion indicates that Plaintiff is incarcerated in Mississippi (DE 35 at 2).
Defendant’s option and consistent with the requirements and needs of Plaintiff’s
place of incarceration.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 24, 2017
s/Anthony P. Patti
Anthony P. Patti
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing order was sent to parties of record on April
24, 2017, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail.
s/Michael Williams
Case Manager for the
Honorable Anthony P. Patti
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?