Rhodes et al v. Ingram et al
ORDER HOLDING IN ABEYANCE 27 Motion for Summary Judgment, HOLDING IN ABEYANCE 29 Motion for Summary Judgment, REFERRING 31 Motion to Compel to US Magistrate Judge James E. Gates, and DENYING AS MOOT 31 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. Signed by US Senior Judge W. Earl Britt on 8/28/2014. (Fisher, M.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
DAVID RHODES and DARLENE
JOHN INGRAM, in his official capacity as
Sheriff of Brunswick County, TIMOTHY
CLEMMONS, TINA EDWARDS, and
WESTERN SURETY COMPANY,
This matter is before the court on plaintiffs David Rhodes and Darlene Holland’s motion
to compel discovery responses, extend discovery deadlines, and deny consideration of
defendants’ motions for summary judgment. (DE # 31.)
Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit on 6 August 2013 in Brunswick County Superior Court, North
Carolina. (DE # 1-2.) Plaintiffs assert claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, (id. ¶ 84), as well as
state law claims of false imprisonment, (id. ¶¶ 91-97), intentional infliction of emotional distress,
(id. ¶¶ 98-104), and negligent infliction of emotional distress, (id. ¶¶ 105-113). Defendants
removed the case to this court on 4 September 2013, (DE # 1-1), and filed an answer on 9
September 2013, (DE # 9). Timothy Clemmons filed a counterclaim against plaintiff David
Rhodes alleging defamation. (Id.)
U.S. Magistrate Judge James E. Gates approved the parties’ joint discovery plan, (DE #
14), on 31 October 2013, (DE # 16). Under the plan, discovery was to be completed by 15 May
2014 and dispositive motions were due by 16 June 2014. (Id. at 1-2.) On 15 May 2014, the day
discovery was set to close, plaintiffs filed a motion for extension of time to complete discovery,
(DE # 25), to which defendants responded in opposition, (DE # 26). While that motion was
pending before Judge Gates, defendants and Timothy Clemmons as counterclaim plaintiff filed
motions for summary judgment on 12 June 2014 and 16 June 2014, respectively. (DE ## 27,
29.) On 1 July 2014, plaintiffs filed the instant motion, (DE # 31), and defendants filed a
response in opposition on 10 July 2014, (DE # 33). On 25 July 2014, Judge Gates granted in
part and denied in part plaintiffs’ original motion for extension of time to complete discovery,
allowing plaintiffs to depose defendant Tina Edwards. (DE # 36.) Plaintiffs filed a reply to
defendants’ response to the instant motion on 28 July 2014, in which plaintiffs acknowledge that
Judge Gates’ ruling now moots their second request for an extension of the discovery deadline.
(DE # 37, at 5.)
Accordingly, plaintiffs’ motion for extension of time to complete discovery is DENIED
Plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery, along with their request for costs and attorney’s
fees, is REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Gates.
Defendants’ motions for summary judgment are HELD IN ABEYANCE pending
disposition of plaintiffs’ motion to compel and subject to further order of this court.
This 28 August 2014.
W. Earl Britt
Senior U.S. District Judge
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?