Pattison v. The State of Nevada, Ex Rel, Nevada Department of Corrections et al

Filing 103

ORDER DENYING P's # 83 Motion to stay briefing ; DENYING P's # 86 Motion to stay deposition; GRANTING P's # 87 Motion to Take Deposition ; DENYING P's # 91 Motion to waive deposition fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke on 2/20/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA DANTE H. PATTISON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) THE STATE OF NEVADA, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) _____________________________ ) PRESENT: 3:14-CV-0020-MMD (VPC) MINUTES OF THE COURT February 20, 2015 THE HONORABLE VALERIE P. COOKE, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEPUTY CLERK: LISA MANN REPORTER: NONE APPEARING COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF(S): NONE APPEARING COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT(S): NONE APPEARING MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS: Plaintiff’s motion to stay briefing schedule of defendants’ motion for leave take deposition of incarcerated plaintiff (#83) is DENIED. Motions for leave to take depositions of incarcerated plaintiffs are routinely granted without briefing as the court did in this case (#80). Plaintiff’s emergency motion to stay deposition (#86) is DENIED. Plaintiff initiated this case and defendants have the right to take his deposition pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 27. Plaintiff has filed a motion to take the depositions of four defendants (#87), and a motion waive all fees associated with the depositions (#91). Plaintiff is permitted to conduct depositions; therefore, his motion to take depositions (#87) is GRANTED. However, plaintiff’s motion to waive all fees associated with the depositions (#91) is DENIED. Plaintiff is not proceeding in this action in forma pauperis because this case was removed by the defendants from the First Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada (#1). However, even assuming arguendo that plaintiff could be considered in forma pauperis, an order granting in forma pauperis status does not extend to the expenses of litigation, Local Special Rule 1-8. Moreover, it is not the court’s obligation nor the defendants’ obligation to pay for a court reporter or require a court reporter to report a deposition at no charge. Therefore, if plaintiff were to take depositions, he will be responsible for properly noticing deposition, making all arrangements for a court reporter and pay all expenses associated with the same. IT IS SO ORDERED. LANCE S. WILSON, CLERK By: /s/ Deputy Clerk

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?