Fletcher v. Houston et al

Filing 47

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Defendants shall respond to Plaintiff's May 21, 2013, request for production of documents and written questions (Filing Nos. 39 and 40 ) by July 29, 2013. Accordingly, Plaintiff is gra nted an extension of time until August 19, 2013, to file a response to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants' Objection (Filing No. 41 ) to Plaintiff's requests for discovery is overruled. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
BARRY W. FLETCHER SR.,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
ROBERT P. HOUSTON, Director,
)
NDCS, sued in their individual
)
capacities, FRANK X. HOPKINS,
)
Deputy Director, NDCS, sued in their )
individual capacities, FRANCES
)
BRITTEN, Warden, Tecumseh State )
Correctional Institution, sued in their )
individual capacities, CATHIE
)
PETERS, mail/material Specialist,
)
Tecumseh State Correctional
)
Institution, sued in their individual
)
capacities, and LEAH
)
SWARTHOUT, Sergeant, Tecumseh )
State Correctional Institution,
)
)
Defendants.
)

4:12CV3179

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff Barry Fletcher’s “Motion Notice to
Allow to Take Deposition Upon Written Questions.” (Filing No. 40.) Liberally
construed, the “written questions” attached to Plaintiff’s Motion are interrogatories
or requests for admission, as Plaintiff makes no mention of completing any of the
technical requirements for taking a deposition by written questions set forth in Rule
31 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Fed. R. Civ. P. 31(a)(3) (requiring a party
who wants to depose a person by written questions to serve a notice on all parties
stating “the name or descriptive title and the address of the officer before whom the
deposition will be taken”). According to the court’s progression ordered entered on
March 25, 2013, all interrogatories, requests for admission, and requests for
production or inspection had to have been served by April 22, 2013. Plaintiff did not

file his motion until May 21, 2013. However, the court notes that the deadline for
depositions is June 3, 2013. Accordingly, on the court’s own motion, the court will
extend the discovery deadline in this matter in order to allow Defendants to respond
to Plaintiff’s discovery requests from May 21, 2013. (See Filing Nos. 39 and 40.)
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
Defendants shall respond to Plaintiff’s May 21, 2013, request for
production of documents and written questions (Filing Nos. 39 and 40) by July 29,
2013.
2.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is granted an extension of time until August 19,
2013, to file a response to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment.
3.
Defendants’ Objection (Filing No. 41) to Plaintiff’s requests for
discovery is overruled.
DATED this 28th day of June, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
United States District Judge

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The
U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend,
approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on
their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties
or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or
functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or
directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
2