From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Olderham v. City of Hillsboro

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division
May 24, 2006
Case No. 1:04-cv-487 (S.D. Ohio May. 24, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. 1:04-cv-487.

May 24, 2006


ORDER


This civil case is before the Court on a pro se motion by plaintiff requesting defendants to produce "any and all" evidence, including evidence relating to the following: background checks on defendants and defendants' witnesses; a copy of plaintiff's deposition; radio messages sent at 3:00 a.m. on April 17, 2004; and cases defense counsel have done before and after that date. ( See Doc. 25.)

Plaintiff's motion, construed as a motion to compel, lacks merit, in part, because he has failed to attach to the motion the affidavit required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(2)(A) and S.D. Ohio Civ. R. 37.2, and thus he has not demonstrated that he has attempted to resolve extrajudicially with defendants his requests for discovery.

Plaintiff's motion also lacks merit because it is untimely. The deadline for discovery expired on April 19, 2005. ( See Doc. 11.) Plaintiff has not shown good cause to extend the discovery deadline or to reopen the discovery period. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 16 and 56(f).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREIN ORDERED THAT plaintiff's Request for Defendants' Evidence on Plaintiff (Doc. 25) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Olderham v. City of Hillsboro

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division
May 24, 2006
Case No. 1:04-cv-487 (S.D. Ohio May. 24, 2006)
Case details for

Olderham v. City of Hillsboro

Case Details

Full title:TERRY OLDERHAM, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF HILLSBORO, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division

Date published: May 24, 2006

Citations

Case No. 1:04-cv-487 (S.D. Ohio May. 24, 2006)