Geissler v. Patterson et al
ORDER granting 38 Motion to Amend/Correct provided Plaintiff files his proposed amended complaint within twenty days from the date of this order; denying Motion to Stay Discovery 47 . Defendants shall have thirty days from the date of this Order to respond to Plaintiff's discovery requests; granting 57 Motion for Copies and the Clerk of Court is directed to forward Plaintiff said copies; denying 58 Motion to Present Compelling Witnesses and Time extention or Continuance; and denied as moot 59 Motion to Compel discovery requests. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas E Rogers, III on 06/09/2017.(dsto, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
C/A No. 4:17-0236-MBS-TER
LISA YOUNG, CAPTAIN OF SALUDA
DORM; DENNIS BUSH, WARDEN, BROAD )
RIVER PRISON; BRIAN SMITH, LT. OVER )
SALUDA ON NIGHT SHIFT; McCLEAN,
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER AT BRCI,
Presently before the court are Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend his complaint
(doc.#38), Defendants’ Motion to Stay Discovery and for an extension to respond to
Plaintiff’s outstanding motions (doc. #47), Plaintiff’s Motion requesting the court to
provide him a free electronic copy of all filed documents in his case (doc.#57),
Plaintiff’s “Motion to Present Compelling Witnesses and Time Extension or
Continuance” (doc. #58), and Plaintiff’s Motion to Request Document Production
First, Plaintiff has filed a Motion to Amend his complaint to add additional
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is outstanding and will be addressed after Plaintiff files his
defendants, change the spelling of some of the current Defendants, amend the relief
requested, and add causes of action. (Doc. #38).
Under Rule 15(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, after the time has
passed to amend a pleading as a matter of course, “a party may amend its pleading
only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave. The court should
freely give leave when justice so requires.” Rule 15(a) is a “liberal rule [that] gives
effect to the federal policy in favor of resolving cases on their merits instead of
disposing of them on technicalities.” Laber v. Harvey, 438 F.3d 404, 426 (4th Cir.
2006) (en banc). However, “[m]otions to amend are committed to the discretion of the
trial court.” Keller v. Prince George's County, 923 F.2d 30, 33 (4th Cir. 1991). Thus,
“[a] district court may deny a motion to amend when the amendment would be
prejudicial to the opposing party, the moving party has acted in bad faith, or the
amendment would be futile.” Equal Rights Ctr. v. Niles Bolton Assocs., 602 F.3d 597,
602-03 (4th Cir. 2010).
The Motion to Amend (doc. #38) is granted provided Plaintiff files his
proposed amended complaint containing within twenty days from the date of this
Defendants’ Motion to Stay Discovery (doc. #47) until the court addresses their
Motion to Dismiss is denied. Defendants shall have thirty days from the date of this
order to respond to Plaintiff’s discovery requests.
Plaintiff’s motion requesting the court to provide him with a free copy of all
electronic filings in this case (doc. #57) is granted and the Clerk of Court is directed
to forward Plaintiff said copies to the Plaintiff.
Plaintiff filed a motion entitled “Motion to Present Compelling Witnesses and
Time extention or Continuance.” (Doc. #58). Defendants filed a response in
opposition. (Doc. #63). In this motion, Plaintiff requests the court to obtain affidavits
from certain officers and inmates “to support his claim as evidence before the court
is to make a dicison (sic) on Summary Judgment.” (Doc. #58). Plaintiff further
requests the court to subpoena the witnesses to testify on his behalf.
This motion is denied with respect to the court obtaining affidavits from
officers and inmates to support his claim in deciding the motion for summary
judgment. A motion for summary judgment has not been filed at this time and this
court does not conduct discovery. The parties may conduct discovery as provided by
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of the District of South
Carolina. See generally, Rules 30 through 37, Fed. R. Civ. P., and Local Rules, D.S.C.
Further, to the extent Plaintiff is attempting to subpoena witnesses to testify at trial,
such request is denied as premature. Therefore, this motion (doc. #58) is denied.
As to any request for appointment of counsel that Plaintiff may be making in this motion
is denied for the reasons set forth in the order of May 16, 2017 (doc. #49).
Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel discovery requests (doc. #59) is denied as moot
in that the Defendants’ motion to stay discovery has been denied within this order, and
Defendants have been given thirty days to respond to Plaintiff’s discovery.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Thomas E. Rogers, III
Thomas E. Rogers, III
United States Magistrate Judge
June 9, 2017
Florence, South Carolina
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?