Turner v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company et al

Filing 7

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Laura Fashing denying 6 Motion for Subpoenas. (lj)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO WESLEY TURNER, Plaintiff, v. No. 1:24-cv-00269-LF PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY and PROGRESSIVE NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SUBPOENAS This case arises out of an accident caused by a vehicle operated by a “negligent driver” and “insured by Progressive.” Complaint of Negligence, Harassment, and Unlawful Tort of Conversion, Doc. 1, filed March 19, 2024 (“Complaint”). Plaintiff asserts negligence and conversion claims against Defendants. Plaintiff now asks the Court to issue subpoenas “necessary for proper court findings.” Motion to Request Court to Order Su[b]p[oe]nas Necessary for Proper Court Findings, Doc. 6, filed March 26, 2024 (“Motion for Subpoenas”). The Court denies Plaintiff’s Motion for Subpoenas as premature. The Court notified Plaintiff that his Complaint failed to state a claim and ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint. See Order for Amended Complaint, Doc. 5, filed March 21, 2024. Production of evidentiary materials is not necessary for Plaintiff to prepare an amended complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P 11(b)(3) (factual contentions must “have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery”). The Court may issue subpoenas, if necessary, during the discovery phase of this case. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Request Court to Order Su[b]p[oe]nas Necessary for Proper Court Findings, Doc. 6, filed March 26, 2024, is DENIED. Plaintiff’s amended complaint remains due on April 11, 2024. _____________________________________ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

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?