Lane v. Clark County

Filing 74

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 72 Motion for Answer to Interrogatories. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 08/17/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - NEV)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

10
RANDEL LANE,
11
Plaintiff,
12
vs.
13
CLARK COUNTY,
14
Defendant.
15
16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:11-cv-00485-JCM-NJK
ORDER
(Docket No. 72)

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Kirk T. Kennedy to Answer Interrogatories.

17 Docket No. 72. For the reasons discussed below, the motion is DENIED.
18

Plaintiff asks the Court to order his former attorney in the instant case to answer 23 separate

19 interrogatories. Id. at 2-3. His former attorney is not a party to this case. Plaintiff submits no authority
20 as to how the Court can order an attorney to respond to interrogatories when he represented the Plaintiff,
21 but is not a party to the case.
22

In any event, discovery in the instant case has been closed since February 2, 2012, and the case

23 itself has been closed in this Court since February 13, 2013. Docket No. 21 at 2; Docket No. 40.
24 Plaintiff cannot move to compel discovery responses more than four years after the close of discovery,
25 and more than three years after the case itself was closed.1
26
27

1

Even if the Court considered Plaintiff’s motion as a motion to compel discovery, it is procedurally
28 incorrect, and would be denied on that basis. See Docket No. 70 at 1-2.

1

Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, Plaintiff’s motion, Docket No. 72, is hereby DENIED.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

3

DATED: August 17, 2016.

4
5
6

______________________________________
__
__________________
_ __ __ ___
__ __
_____________
_
NANCY J. KOPPE
N C
NANCY KOPPE
OPPE
United States Magis
States Ma is
Magistrate Judge
t
strate

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2