Goodwin v. Hatten

Full title: LUCAS GOODWIN, Plaintiff, v. JOE N. HATTEN, et al, Defendants

Court: United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Gainesville Division

Date published: Apr 7, 2009

CASE NO. 1:07CV123-MP/AK (N.D. Fla. Apr. 7, 2009)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:07CV123-MP/AK.

April 7, 2009

ORDER

ALLAN KORNBLUM, Magistrate Judge

Presently before the Court is Defendant's Motion for Exemption from the Court's Case Management Scheduling Order requiring initial disclosures. (Doc. 56). Plaintiff has filed a motion to compel these disclosures in response to Defendants' motion. (Doc. 57).

Plaintiff is entitled to discovery, but the Court is of the opinion that the best course is, as Defendants suggest, to allow them to file their motion for summary judgement and provide what evidentiary material they deem relevant with that motion. Therefore, Defendants will not be required to serve initial disclosures, but they are not otherwise exempt from participating in discovery.

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED:

1. Defendant's Motion for Exemption (doc. 56) is GRANTED.

2. Plaintiff's Motion to Compel (doc. 57) is DENIED. DONE AND ORDERED.