Landers v. Nebraska Department of Corrections et al

Filing 52

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Defendants' "Motion to Stay Discovery" (Filing No. 50 ) is granted. Discovery is stayed until further order of the court. This means that Defendants are not required to respond to any outstanding discovery reque sts, and Plaintiff is not authorized to serve any additional discovery requests, unless and until the court enters an order lifting the stay. Plaintiff is not prohibited from filing a properly supported motion to obtain court approval to conduct limited discovery regarding issues raised by Defendants once they file their anticipated summary judgment motion. See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d). Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LKO)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
DYLAN ERIC LANDERS,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SCOTT FRAKES, DIANE SABATKARINE, J. BEATY, Research
Representative; C. CONNELLY,
Intelligence Representative; M.
ROTHWELL, Classification
Representative; and S. BRYANT, PsyD,
Mental Health Representative;

8:17CV371
MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

Defendants.
This matter is before the court on Defendants’ “Motion to Stay Discovery.”
(Filing No. 50.) Defendant filed a brief in support of their motion stating that they
intend to file a summary judgment motion on the issue of qualified immunity.
(Filing No. 51.) They seek an order staying discovery until the court resolves their
anticipated motion on qualified immunity.
The doctrine of qualified immunity is designed to protect state actors from
monetary damages and the costs associated with litigation, such as discovery.
Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 817-18 (1982). Qualified immunity is “an
immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability.” Mitchell v. Forsyth,
472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985) (emphasis in original). Thus, where qualified immunity
is asserted as a defense, it is within the discretion of the court to stay discovery
until the issue of qualified immunity is resolved. See Ballard v. Heineman, 548
F.3d 1132, 1136-37 (8th Cir. 2008).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
Defendants’ “Motion to Stay Discovery” (Filing No. 50) is granted.
Discovery is stayed until further order of the court. This means that Defendants are
not required to respond to any outstanding discovery requests, and Plaintiff is not
authorized to serve any additional discovery requests, unless and until the court
enters an order lifting the stay.
2.
Plaintiff is not prohibited from filing a properly supported motion to
obtain court approval to conduct limited discovery regarding issues raised by
Defendants once they file their anticipated summary judgment motion. See Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d).
Dated this 26th day of July, 2018.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Richard G. Kopf
Senior United States District Judge

2