Wood v. Sehorn et al

Filing 49

ORDER: Presently pending are the plaintiff's motion for an order of discovery (Docket Entry No. 34) and motion to compel (Docket Entry No. 37). The motions are DENIED. The plaintiff's two motions to ascertain status (Docket Entry Nos. 35 an d 46) are GRANTED. By this Order and contemporaneously entered Report and Recommendation, all motions that have been filed by the plaintiff have been addressed by the Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Juliet E. Griffin on 7/7/14. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION

JAMES L. WOOD
v.
DAVID SEHORN, et al.

)
)
)
)
)

NO. 3:14-0617

ORDER
Presently pending are the plaintiff’s motion for an order of discovery (Docket Entry No. 34)
and motion to compel (Docket Entry No. 37). Defendant Sehorn has filed a response (Docket Entry
No. 39) in opposition to the motion to compel, to which the plaintiff has filed a reply (Docket Entry
No. 47).

Although it is somewhat unclear exactly what the plaintiff seeks by his motions, he

appears to request an order from the Court either permitting him to serve discovery requests upon
the Defendants or directing that discovery be issued to Defendant Nwozo. Both motions are based
upon the plaintiff’s apparent understanding that such an order is required by Rule 5(d)1 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule 5.022 of the Local Rules of Court.

1

Rule 5(d)(1) reads in part:

. . . disclosures under Rule 26(a)(1) or (2) and the following discovery requests and
responses must not be filed until they are used in the proceeding or the court orders
filing: depositions, interrogatories, requests for documents or tangible things or to
permit entry onto land, and requests for admission.
2

Local Rule 5.02 reads:

Pursuant to the provisions of Rule 5(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
depositions, interrogatories, requests for documents, requests for admissions, and
answers and responses thereto shall not be filed with the Clerk’s office, except in
support of or in opposition to a motion or by order of the Court.

The motions are DENIED. The plaintiff’s understanding of Rule 5(d) and Local Rule 5.02
is mistaken. Both rules merely preclude the parties from filing discovery requests and responses
unless filed in support or opposition to a motion or filed upon order of the Court. Accordingly, no
order is required from the Court prior to the plaintiff serving timely discovery requests upon the
Defendants, and the Clerk’s Office properly returned to the plaintiff the copies of his discovery
requests directed to Defendant Nwozo that were sent to the Court. See Docket Entry No. 46, at 6.
Further, despite the plaintiff’s requests for some type of order from the Court permitting discovery,
he states that he has served his discovery requests upon Defendant Nwozo. See Docket Entry
No. 47, at 2.
To the extent that what the plaintiff seeks is to file discovery responses in opposition to the
pending dispositive motions, he is permitted to file these responses but should file them as exhibits
in connection with his response and not as independent filings. To the extent that the plaintiff is
actually seeking to compel discovery, he has not shown a basis for such a motion. On June 20, 2014,
Defendant Nwozo filed a notice that he had served responses to the plaintiff’s discovery requests,
see Docket Entry No. 42, and Defendant Sehorn contends that no actual discovery requests directed
at him have ever been served upon him. See Docket Entry No. 39.
The plaintiff’s two motions to ascertain status (Docket Entry Nos. 35 and 46) are
GRANTED. By this Order and contemporaneously entered Report and Recommendation, all
motions that have been filed by the plaintiff have been addressed by the Court.
Any party desiring to appeal this Order may do so by filing a motion for review no later than
fourteen (14) days from the date this Order is served upon the party. The motion for review must

2

be accompanied by a brief or other pertinent documents to apprise the District Judge of the basis for
appeal. See Rule 72.02(b) of the Local Rules of Court.
So ORDERED.

JULIET GRIFFIN
United States Magistrate Judge

3