From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Leonard v. Smoot

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Mar 18, 2013
Civil Action No.1:13-cv-97 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 18, 2013)

Opinion

Civil Action No.1:13-cv-97

03-18-2013

RONALD LEONARD, Plaintiff, v. SMOOT, Defendants.


Spiegel, J.

Bowman, M.J.


ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's motion to compel discovery of production of security surveillance, camera's video tape, motion requesting clerk to Issue Plaintiff subpoena for US Marshall's service, motion for discovery plan and conference (Doc. 2). Plaintiff's motions(s) are not well-taken. Notably, subsequent to the filing of the instant motion, Plaintiff filed motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff's motion for IFP remains pending; as such, this matter has yet to be served on Defendant. Accordingly, Plaintiff's instant motion (Doc. 2) is premature and is therefore DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_________________________________

Stephanie K. Bowman

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Leonard v. Smoot

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Mar 18, 2013
Civil Action No.1:13-cv-97 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 18, 2013)
Case details for

Leonard v. Smoot

Case Details

Full title:RONALD LEONARD, Plaintiff, v. SMOOT, Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Date published: Mar 18, 2013

Citations

Civil Action No.1:13-cv-97 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 18, 2013)