Christian v. McMahan Ford et al

Filing 135

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 63 PRO SE MOTION Transcript of Rule 16 Conference filed by Plaintiff Fred Christian, 81 PRO SE MOTION Court Assistance From it's Fund to Assist Pro Se Plaintiff in Taking Necessary Depositions of Defendants Wi t memorandum in Support filed by Plaintiff Fred Christian, 65 MOTION for Reconsideration re 56 Docket Text Order filed by Plaintiff Fred Christian. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the plaintiff's requests for issuance of subpoenas (#132) DE NIED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff's motion for court assistance regarding depositions (#81) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's motion requesting a transcript (#63) is DENIED. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration (#65) is DENIED. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 9/15/14. (CSG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

FRED CHRISTIAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
MCMAHON FORD, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:14-cv-454 SNLJ

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiff’s requests for issuance of subpoenas
(#132), plaintiff’s motion for court assistance regarding depositions (#81), plaintiff’s motion
requesting a transcript (#63), and plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of plaintiff’s motion for
recusal (#65).
Plaintiff’s request for the issuance of subpoenas to individuals at the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) and the Missouri Commission on Human Rights (“MCHR”)
is denied for the reasons specified in the Court’s September 12, 2014 order (#134).
Plaintiff’s motion for assistance requests use of Court funds to pay for depositions he seeks
to take of the defendants. Plaintiff had already arranged for a Court reporter to take the deposition
on dates certain, and he requests $500 from the “Court’s funds.” Plaintiff notes that he is
proceeding in forma pauperis, but he does not cite any authority for his request for such funds, nor
does he specify a source of any such funds. Even if there were such a fund available to assist pro
se plaintiffs, plaintiff is in serious dereliction of his discovery obligations, as set forth in this
Court’s September 12, 2014 order (#134). The motion will be denied.

1

Next, plaintiff seeks a transcript of the Court’s Rule 16 conference with the parties (#63) so
that he may prepare his appellate brief in support of his interlocutory appeal of this Court’s denial
of plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel. Plaintiff filed the motion on July 3, 2014, and
the Court of Appeals denied and dismissed his appeal on July 10, 2014 (#68). The motion will be
denied as moot. Plaintiff is advised, however, that he should contact the court reporter for any
transcript requests in the future.
Finally, plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of this Court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion
for recusal will be denied.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the plaintiff’s requests for issuance of subpoenas (#132)
DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff’s motion for court assistance regarding
depositions (#81) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion requesting a transcript (#63) is
DENIED.
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (#65) is
DENIED.

Dated this 15th

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

day of September, 2014.

2