Burton v. Hoskins et al

Filing 71

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 68 MOTION for Issuance Summonses filed by Plaintiff Victor Ray Burton, 64 MOTION for Leave to File Additional Written Interrogatories filed by Plaintiff Victor Ray Burton. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion for Issuance of Summonses (#68) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk ofCourt shall shall issue process or cause process to be issued on defendant Tammi Martinez; IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Additional Written Interrogatories (#64) is DENIED as moot. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 6/24/13. (CSG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION

VICTOR R. BURTON,
Plaintiff,

v.
BRYAN HOSKINS, et at.,
Defendants.

)

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1:10CV165 SNLJ

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs Motion for Issuance of Summonses (#68)
and Motion for Leave to File Additional Written Interrogatories (#64). Defendants have not
responded to either motion, and the time for doing so has passed.

I.

Motion for Issuance of Summonses (#68)
Plaintiff filed his amended complaint on April 22, 2013. In that amended complaint,

plaintiff named four defendants who had not already been served with process in this case:
Tammi Martinez, Felicia Dodge, Heather Annesser, and Amanda Hill. However, defendants
Dodge, Annesser, and Hill had been previously dismissed without prejudice by this Court for
plaintiff's failure to serve them with process. (See Orders, Documents #28 and #62.) Plaintiff
may not now add them back to this matter by re-naming them as defendants in this matter.
As for plaintiff's addition of defendant Tammi Martinez, plaintiffs claims survive review
under 28 U.S.c. § 1915(e)(2)(B), and the clerk shall be directed to issue process or cause process
to be issued on that defendant.

II.

Motion for Leave to File Additional Written Interrogatories (#64)
Next, on April 22, 2013, plaintiff sought leave to serve additional written interrogatories

on defendants. In the Court's April 2, 2013 memorandum and order (#62), the plaintiff was
given until April 23, 2013 by which to serve his last set of interrogatories on defendants. It
appears the plaintiff filed these interrogatories in error, as discovery requests are not filed with
the Court. Defendants have apparently been served with the interrogatories. The motion is
denied as moot.
Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion for Issuance of Summonses (#68) is
GRANTED in part and DENIED in part;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall shall issue process or cause
process to be issued on defendant Tammi Martinez;

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Additional
Written Interrogatories (#64) is DENIED as moot.
Dated this..1-rte: day of June, 2013.

STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, .
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2­