Varney v. Mullisk et al

Filing 55

ORDER denying 35 Motion to Compel; denying 51 Motion for production of documents ; denying 54 Motion for subpoenas. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 2/10/16. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(clc)

DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
3:13-cv-595-FDW
LOWELL MASON VARNEY,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
FNU MULLISK, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
___________________________________ )

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Production of
Medical Records, (Doc. No. 35), on Plaintiff’s Motion for Production of Documents, (Doc. No.
51), and on Plaintiff’s Motion for Subpoena/Summons, (Doc. No. 54).
First, as to Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Production of Medical Records, (Doc. No. 35),
the motion is denied. As Defendant has explained in the response to the motion to compel, when
Plaintiff filed the motion to compel, the time had not expired for Defendant to respond to
Plaintiff’s first request for production of documents. See (Doc. No. 38). Therefore, the motion
to compel is denied.
Next, as to Plaintiff’s Motion for Production of Documents, (Doc. No. 51), and
Plaintiff’s Motion for Subpoena/Summons, (Doc. No. 54), pursuant to Local Rule 26.2 and the
Court’s scheduling order entered on October 16, 2015, all discovery requests in this matter are to
be served on the parties, and discovery requests are not to be filed with the Court. (Doc. No. 34).
Thus, Plaintiff shall serve his discovery requests on Defendant, rather than filing a motion with
the Court seeking this discovery. To the extent that Plaintiff seeks, in his motion for
subpoena/summons, for this court to subpoena various witnesses so that the witnesses can
1

produce statements regarding the alleged excessive force incident at issue, the Court in its
discretion declines to do so.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
(1)

Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Production of Medical Records, (Doc. No. 35),
Plaintiff’s Motion for Production of Documents, (Doc. No. 51), and Plaintiff’s
Motion for Subpoena/Summons, (Doc. No. 54), are DENIED.

2