Malady v. Corizon et al

Filing 47

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER...IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs Response to Defendants' Objections and Responses to Plaintiff's First Request for Production of Documents (#43) is DENIED as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's Request for Declaratory Judgment (#44) is DENIED. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 12/26/13. (MRS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION

JOHN TIMOTHY MALADY,
Plaintiff(s),
vs.
CORIZON, et al,
Defendant(s).

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1:13-CV-80 SNLJ

MEMORANDUM and ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Objections and
Responses to Plaintiff’s First Request for Production of Documents (#43) and plaintiff’s Request
for Declaratory Judgment (#44).
The Court did not enter a Case Management Order in this matter until October 30, 2013.
Because discovery could not take place until entry of that order, this Court denied plaintiff’s
earlier Motion to Compel as moot. Plaintiff’s “Response to Defendants’ Objections and
Responses to Plaintiff’s First Request for Production of Documents,” which seeks an order
compelling production of documents and which was dated October 28, 2013, was therefore
premature and will also be denied as moot.
Plaintiff, in his “Request for Declaratory Judgment,” appears to respond to the
defendants’ invocation of the statute of limitations in their Answer to the Complaint. He says
that the affirmative defense of the statute of limitations is improper because he believes he
suffers from a “continuing wrong.” Thus he requests that the Court order that plaintiff may bring
all evidence pertaining to his claim regardless of time period and deny the statute of limitations
defense. Plaintiff’s arguments as to the statute of limitations will be more properly made during

briefing on summary judgment in this matter. At this time, dispositive motions such as motions
for summary judgment are not due until March 28, 2014. As a result, the Court will deny
plaintiff’s request.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Objections and
Responses to Plaintiff’s First Request for Production of Documents (#43) is DENIED as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s Request for Declaratory Judgment (#44) is
DENIED.
Dated this 26th day of December, 2013.

___________________________
STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE