Cage v. Michigan, State of et al
Filing
11
ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 4 Motion for Production of Documents Without Prejudice. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
HAROLD CAGE,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 16-11679
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman
v.
STATE OF MICHIGAN et al.,
Defendants.
__________________________________________________________________/
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS WITHOUT PREJUDICE (ECF #4)
On May 4, 2016, Plaintiff Harold Cage (“Cage”) filed a prisoner civil-rights
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (See ECF #1.) Among other things, Cage
alleges that Defendants have (1) deprived him of adequate, effective, and
meaningful access to the courts, (2) demonstrated deliberate indifference to his
serious medical needs, (3) subjected him to cruel and unusual punishment in
violation of the Eighth Amendment, (4) retaliated against him, (5) violated his
rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, (6) conspired against him, and
(7) violated his rights under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. (See
id.)
Cage has also filed a “Motion for Production of Documents” (the
“Discovery Motion”). (See ECF #4.) In the Discovery Motion, Cage asks the
1
Defendants to produce certain documents and video footage he says are necessary
for him to prosecute his Complaint. At this time, the Complaint has not yet been
served on any Defendant nor has any Defendant appeared in this action.
Accordingly, the Discovery Motion is premature. The Court will therefore DENY
the Discovery Motion without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: June 20, 2016
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the
parties and/or counsel of record on June 20, 2016, by electronic means and/or
ordinary mail.
s/Holly A. Monda
Case Manager
(313) 234-5113
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?