LeBlanc v. NH State Prison, Warden et al

Filing 29

///ORDER approving 28 Discovery Plan; denying without prejudice 27 Discovery Plan and denying without prejudice 25 Motion to Compel. Summary Judgment Motions due by 7/8/2013. Dispositive Motion Filing Deadline 3/15/201 3. Discovery deadline 7/12/2013. ( Summary Judgment Motions due by 7/8/2013. Dispositive Motion Filing Deadline 3/15/2013. Discovery deadline 7/12/2013. Further, the court grants oral request and instructs the clerks office to terminate Phelps as a named defendant from the case. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Landya B. McCafferty.(cmp)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Daniel J. LeBlanc, Sr.
v.

Civil No. 12-cv-084-JL

Kevin Stevenson, et al.
O R D E R
On November 26, 2012, a preliminary pretrial conference
was held in this case.

Plaintiff appeared via telephone on

his own behalf; Attorney Lynmarie C. Cusack appeared for
defendants Kevin Stevenson, Pal Casio, Teresa Quint and
Janis Phelps; and Attorney Martin P. Honigberg appeared for
defendants Emily Bryant and Anthony Ramirez.

The court

approved the defendants’ joint proposed discovery plan (doc.
no. 28), with only minor amendments thereto.
The key deadlines in the discovery plan are summarized
in the chart below.

The parties concurred with respect to

each of the following deadlines.

Scheduling Designation

Deadline

Joinder of Additional
Parties

Plaintiff: December 1, 2012
Defendants: January 1, 2013

Third-Party Actions

December 1, 2012

Amendment of Pleadings

Plaintiff: December 1, 2012
Defendants: January 1, 2013

Offer

February 1, 2013

Experts and Experts'
Written Reports


Plaintiff: February 28, 2013
Defendants: May 1, 2013

Supplementation under
Rule 26(a)

As required by Rule 26(e)(2)

Motions to Dismiss

March 15, 2013

Motions for Summary
Judgment

July 8, 2013

Completion of Discovery

July 12, 2013

Challenges to Expert
Testimony
Trial Estimate (number of
days)

September 22, 2013
2-3 days
Two-week period beginning
November 5, 2013

Trial Date

In light of the court’s approval of defendant’s
proposed discovery plan (doc. no. 28), the court denies as
moot plaintiff’s proposed discovery plan (doc. no. 27).
Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion to
compel (doc. no. 25).

Plaintiff filed the motion before

forwarding a formal discovery request to the defendants.
such, the motion is untimely.

As

The court denies the motion

(doc. no. 25) without prejudice to plaintiff’s right to file
such a motion in the event defendants fail to provide
plaintiff with discovery to which plaintiff believes he is
entitled.

Defendants have agreed to construe the motion as

a formal discovery request and will respond to it within
thirty days from the date of the hearing.
Plaintiff made an oral motion to voluntarily dismiss
Janis Phelps as a named defendant in the case.
2

Rather than

require plaintiff to file a formal written request to
dismiss Phelps from the case, the court grants his oral
request and instructs the clerk’s office to terminate Phelps
as a named defendant from the case.

__________________________
Landya B. McCafferty
United States Magistrate Judge
November 27, 2012
cc:

Daniel J. LeBlanc, Sr., pro se
Lynmarie C. Cusack, Esq.
Martin P. Honigberg, Esq.

3