Cunningham v. McCluskey et al
ORDER: Plaintiff raises no consideration that causes the Court to vacate the grant of the stay. Plaintiff also requests a hearing on the admissibility of certain evidence against plaintiff's husband, which plaintiff contends was unlawfully obtai ned, that defendants may seek to use in support of a motion for summary judgment or at an eventual jury trial. There is no reason this issue needs to be addressed at this time and can be more properly addressed following the end of the stay. Finally, plaintiff continues to rehash discovery disputes which have been thoroughly disposed of by Magistrate Judge Eaton, whose rulings plaintiffs has already twice unsuccessfully challenged before this Court. This Court again reiterates that no basis has been shown for reversing any of Magistrate Judge Eaton's discovery rulings. Plaintiff is also again reminded that discovery in this matter is now closed and this Court will proceed to the merits of this case following the Court of Appeals' decision in Cunningham v. USMS, No. 07-4006-AS. (Signed by Judge Gerard E. Lynch on 3/16/2009) Copies Mailed By Chambers.(jpo)
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?