Bain et al v. Town of Hempstead et al
Filing
14
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER granting the defendants' 8 MOTION to stay discovery pending resolution of the motion to dismiss; directing that discovery in this matter is stayed pending resolution of the defendants' 5 motion to dismiss. Signed by Judge John T. Copenhaver, Jr. on 1/5/2017. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented parties) (taq)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
AT CHARLESTON
TANNER BAIN, by his father and
natural guardian, DUSTIN BAIN,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action No. 2:16-9281
TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD and TOWN OF
HEMPSTEAD ANIMAL SHELTER,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Pending is a motion by defendants to stay discovery
pending resolution of the motion to dismiss, filed December 14,
2016.
The plaintiff responded to the motion to stay on December
29, 2016, stating that he consents to the motion to stay so long
as the stay only lasts until the court decides the pending motion
to dismiss.
Under Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 26(c)(1), the court has the
authority to stay discovery pending the outcome of a dispositive
motion.
See Thigpen v. United States, 800 F.2d 393, 396-397 (4th
Cir. 1986).
The court notes that the defendants’ motion to dismiss
could be dispositive of the matter, as they contend that the case
should be dismissed because the court lacks personal jurisdiction
and venue over the defendants, or alternatively, that the case
should be transferred to the Eastern District of New York in the
interest of justice and for the convenience of the parties and
witnesses.
There are no cross-claims or counterclaims and both
defendants join in the motion to stay.
The defendants argue that the stay will be short and
thus will minimally burden plaintiff.
Stay at 2.
Memo. in Supp. of Mot. to
Further, they contend that it is proper to resolve the
jurisdictional issues before the parties engage in what may be
unnecessary initial disclosures and a Rule 26(f) meeting.
Id.
As noted previously, plaintiff supports the motion, as
long as it continues only until the pending motion to dismiss is
decided by the court.
Resp. to Mot. to Stay at 1.
Having considered the applicable factors, the court
finds that a stay is warranted.
By first determining whether the
court has jurisdiction over the defendants, the court can ensure
that the parties do not participate in needless discovery.
Moreover, the action is in its early stages, as the court has yet
to enter a scheduling order and the parties’ Rule 26(f) report is
not due to the court until January 13, 2017, all of which favors a
stay.
2
01/28/2016
Motions under F.R. Civ. P. 12(b), together with
supporting briefs, memoranda, affidavits, or other
such matter in support thereof. (All motions
unsupported by memoranda will be denied without
prejudice pursuant to L.R. Civ. P. 7.1 (a)).
Accordingly, the court 26(f) meeting. defendants’
02/08/2016
Last day for Rule ORDERS that the
02/15/2016
motion to stay Last day to file Report of Parties= Planningto
discovery pending resolution of the motion
Meeting. See L.R. Civ. P. 16.1.
dismiss, filed December 14, 2016, be, and it hereby is, granted.
02/22/2016
Scheduling conference at 4:30 p.m. at the Robert C.
It is further ORDERED that States Courthouse in Charleston, before
Byrd United discovery in this matter be, and it
the undersigned, unless canceled. Lead counsel
hereby is, stayed pending resolution of the defendants’ motion to
directed to appear.
02/29/2016
dismiss.
03/08/2016
Entry of scheduling order.
Last day to serve F.R. Civ. P 26(a)(1) disclosures.
The Clerk is directed to transmit this order to all
The Clerk is requested to transmit this Order and
counsel to all counsel any record and to any unrepresented
Notice of record and of unrepresented parties.
parties.
ENTER: January 5,5, 2016
DATED: January 2017
John T. Copenhaver, Jr.
United States District Judge
3
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?