Skorychenko v. Tompkins

Filing 78

ORDER denying 76 Motion for Issuance of Subpoena. Signed by Chief Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 3/3/2010. (eds),(ps)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FO R THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN --------------------------------------------L U D M Y L A SKORYCHENKO, ORDER Plaintiff, 0 8 - cv -6 2 6 - b b c v. ER N E ST F. TOMPKINS, D efendan t, an d K R AFT PIZZA COMPANY, G arn ishee. --------------------------------------------Plaintiff Ludmyla Skorychenko is proceeding with garnishment proceedings to collect on the November 18, 2009 judgment in this action. Along with her recent request to execu te the judgment, which I construed as a garnishment notice, plaintiff filed a motion for issuance of a subpoena for N.E.W. Curative Rehabilitation, Inc. to produce documents co nfirm ing her enrollment in a Title V Senior Community Service Employment Program. I will deny plaintiff's request for the subpoena because she does not explain how this info rm ation is relevant to the garnishment proceedings, and in any case, these proceedings 1 h ave not advanced to a stage where plaintiff would be required to submit evidence of any kind. Should the case advance to that point, plaintiff is free to renew her request. If she d oes so, she must explain why the material she seeks is relevant to the garnishment pro ceedings, OR DER IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for issuance of a subpoena, dkt. #76, is D E N IE D . E n tered this 3 r d day of March, 2010. B Y THE COURT: /s/ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ B AR B AR A B. CRABB D istrict Judge 2

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?