Campbell v. Barney et al

Filing 25

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Charles S. Miller, Jr. denying 24 Request for Subpoenas. (BG) Distributed on 5/13/2016. (rh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
Anthony Leon Campbell,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
Chuck Barney, Mayor of Minot, Leann
)
Bertsch, Director, Department of
)
Corrections and Rehabilitation, Steve
)
Kukowski, Sheriff and Jail Commissioner, )
Ward County, and Paul Othoff,
)
Commander, Ward County Jail,
)
)
Defendants.
)

ORDER

Case No. 4:15-141

The plaintiff, Anthony Campbell, was a detainee at the Ward County Jail, in Minot, North
Dakota, when he initiated this action in November 2015. Upon screening his pleadings, the court
permitted Campbell to proceed with his “conditions-of-confinement” claims against Defendants
Kukowski and Othoff but only in regards to his alleged exposure to toxic black mold, unsanitary
bedding, unsanitary clothing, and contaminated drinking water.
On May 9, 2016, Campbell filed a “Motion for Order to Subpoena Witnesses.” Therein, he
requests the court’s assistance in subpoenaing four prospective witnesses to testify at trial.
Additionally, he requests “all relevant video, audio, including any documentation or reports relative
or/and in connection with the above entitled matter.”
Campbell’s motion is premature. Defendants Kukowki and Othoff have yet to file an answer
or otherwise respond to Campbell’s pleadings. Rule 26(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
provides that the parties may not seek discovery until they have conferred as required by Rule 26(f)
for the purpose of developing a plan for discovery, among other things. In this case, however, the

1

court will not require a Rule 26(f) conference given the difficulty the plaintiff has in conferring with
the other parties. Rather, after Defendants Kukowski and Othoff have filed a responsive pleading,
the court will issue an order requiring each party to file a proposed scheduling/discovery plan
pursuant to a form provided and the court will then issue a scheduling/discovery order and schedule
the trial. Until the court issues its discovery order, all discovery is stayed.
Accordingly, Campbell’s “Motion for Order to Subpoena Witnesses” (Docket No. 24) is
DENIED without prejudice as it is premature. Further, it is hereby ordered that all discovery is
STAYED until the court issues its scheduling/discovery order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 13th day of May, 2016.
/s/ Charles S. Miller, Jr.
Charles S. Miller, Jr., Magistrate Judge
United States District Court

2