Smalley v. Gamache et al

Filing 85

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion 84 is granted in part only to the extent set out above, and is denied in all other respects. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Canava is required to respond to the request for interrogatories and file his response as set out above by August 15, 2012.. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 8/3/12. (LGK)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION JAMES SMALLEY, Plaintiff, vs. MICHAEL GAMACHE, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 4:10CV319 RWS MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff’s latest motion complains that defendants have refused to answer interrogatories directed to defendant Canava on the ground that they did not receive the request. Plaintiff attached these allegedly unanswered interrogatories to his motion, so the Court will deem them served on defendant and will shorten the time to respond to August 15, 2012, for good cause shown. As with defendants’ response to plaintiff’s motion for production of documents, I will also order defendant Canava to file his written responses to these interrogatories with the Court since there has been so much prior litigation about the adequacy of defendants’ responses. The responses shall be attached as a exhibit to a Notice of compliance with this Order. As for plaintiff’s request for a free copy of his deposition transcript, his in forma pauperis status does not entitle him to a free copy of his transcript. However, to the extent that defendants rely on any deposition transcripts in support of summary judgment, including plaintiff’s, I will require defendants to file a complete copy of all deposition transcripts, not just excerpted portions, with the Court. Of course, defendants would then be required to serve copies of the deposition transcripts on plaintiff as part of their motion for summary judgment. Otherwise, plaintiff is required to pay for his deposition transcript just like any other civil litigant. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion [#84] is granted in part only to the extent set out above, and is denied in all other respects. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Canava is required to respond to the request for interrogatories and file his response as set out above by August 15, 2012. RODNEY W. SIPPEL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated this 3rd day of August, 2012. -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?