Evans v. Nebr Beef

Filing 79

AMENDED ORDER - IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff's objections (Filing No. 65 and Filing No. 66 ) are overruled. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(GJG)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA CHARLES EVANS III, Plaintiff, 8:12CV161 vs. AMENEDED ORDER NEBRASKA BEEF, LTD., Defendant. This matter is before the court on the pro se plaintiff’s objections, Filing No. 65 and Filing No. 66, to an order of the magistrate judge, Filing No. 63, granting the defendant’s motion to compel and for additional time to complete discovery, Filing No. 58. On review of a decision of the magistrate judge on a pretrial matter, the district court may set aside any part of the magistrate judge's order that it finds is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(A); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a); In re Lane, 801 F.2d 1040, 1042 (8th Cir. 1986). See also Bialas v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 59 F.3d 759, 764 (8th Cir. 1995) (noting that “a magistrate is afforded broad discretion in the resolution of nondispositive discovery disputes”). Based on his familiarity with the case, the magistrate judge was within his discretion to order the plaintiff to submit to a deposition and to respond to interrogatories. The plaintiff has not shown that the magistrate judge’s findings are clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff’s objections (Filing No. 65 and Filing No. 66) are overruled. DATED this 15th day of January, 2014. BY THE COURT: s/ Joseph F. Bataillon United States District Judge

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?