York v. Starks et al

Filing 62

ORDER denying Plaintiff's 57 MOTION to Compel as moot; granting Defendants' 60 MOTION to Compel; and granting Defendants' 61 MOTION for Extension of time to file dispositive motions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shiva V Hodges on 7/14/2017. (mwal)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Herbert Demond York,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Ofc. T. Starks; Ofc. Lovine; Major
Jackson; and Juan Estrada,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No.: 1:16-3972-RMG-SVH

ORDER

Herbert Demond York (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed
this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his constitutional rights by
the following employees of the South Carolina Department of Corrections: Officer T.
Starks, Officer Lovine, Major Jackson, and Juan Estrada (“Defendants”). This matter
comes before the court on Plaintiff’s motion to compel [ECF No. 57] and on Defendants’
motions to compel [ECF No. 60] and for an extension of time [ECF No. 61].
I.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel
Plaintiff filed a motion to compel on June 8, 2017 [ECF No. 57], requesting

Defendants respond to his first requests for production of documents, which he alleges he
served on March 31, 2017. Plaintiff did not attach the discovery requests. On June 22,
2017, Defendants responded by stating that they were first served with discovery requests
from Plaintiff on May 25, 2017, to which counsel was preparing timely responses. [ECF
No. 58]. Plaintiff did not file a reply. Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion to compel is denied as
moot.

II.

Defendants’ Motion to Compel and for an Extension
Defendants filed their motion to compel on July 13, 2017. [ECF No. 60].

Defendants state they served Plaintiff with discovery requests on March 16, 2017. After
receiving several extensions, Plaintiffs’ responses were due July 5, 2017. Id. As of the
date of Defendants’ motion, Plaintiff failed to serve responses to Defendants’ discovery
requests. Id. The undersigned grants Defendants’ motion to compel and directs Plaintiff
to serve Defendants with discovery responses by August 4, 2017. Plaintiff is warned that
no further extensions will be granted and failure to serve discovery responses may result
in a recommendation that this matter be dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to participate in
discovery.
The current deadline for the completion of discovery in this case is July 5, 2017,
and the dispositive motions are due by July 19, 2017. Defendants request an extension of
the dispositive motion deadline until Plaintiff serves his discovery responses. [ECF No.
61]. The court grants the motion and extends the deadline for filing dispositive motions to
September 1, 2017.
III.

Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s motion to compel [ECF No. 57] is denied as

moot and Defendants’ motion to compel [ECF No. 60] and motion for an extension [ECF
No. 61] are granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

July 14, 2017
Columbia, South Carolina

Shiva V. Hodges
United States Magistrate Judge
2