Hill v. Goodwin et al

Filing 9

ORDER STAYING CASE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden on 2/14/18. (bfg)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
OXFORD DIVISION
FRANKIE WAYNE HILL

VS.

PLAINTIFF

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:18-cv-00015-GHD-JMV

PERRY GOODWIN
MACEL APPLETON
DENNIS HOPPER

DEFENDANTS

ORDER STAYING CERTAIN PROCEEDINGS
This matter comes before the court, sua sponte, on Defendants’ motion to dismiss premised
on qualified immunity [7] filed February 13, 2018.
Local Uniform Civil Rule 16(b)(3)(B) provides that “[f]iling a motion asserting…an
immunity defense … stays the attorney conference and disclosure requirements and all discovery,
pending the court’s ruling on the motion, including any appeal. Whether to permit discovery on
issues related to the motion… [is a decision] committed to the discretion of the court.” L. U. CIV.
R. 16(b)(3)(B).
Accordingly, a stay of certain proceedings is appropriate. Should the parties desire to
undertake immunity-related discovery, they should contact the court for scheduling of same.
IT IS, THERFORE, ORDERED that the case management conference and the
aforementioned proceedings are hereby STAYED pending a ruling on the motion. Defendants
shall notify the undersigned magistrate judge within seven (7) days of a decision on the motion
and shall submit a proposed order lifting the stay.
SO ORDERED this, February 14, 2018.
/s/ Jane M. Virden
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE