Opinion
CIVIL ACTION No. 01-2227-JWL
October 19, 2001
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the following motions: Judge McAnany's Motion for Stay of Rule 26 Proceedings and for Protective Order (doc. 21); (2) Defendant Melinda Whitman's Motion for Stay of Rule 26 Proceedings and Related Relief (doc. 23); and (3) Motion for Stay of Rule 26 Proceedings filed by Defendants Paul Morrison, Adrian Gilby, Brian Porch, the Johnson County District Attorney's office, and the State of Kansas (doc. 26).
The Court will grant the motions and will stay all Rule 26 and other pretrial proceedings, including discovery, until the Court has ruled on the pending motions to dismiss filed by Defendants. A stay is appropriate here under the factors set forth in Wolf v. United States, 157 F.R.D. 494, 495 (D.Kan. 1994). That case held that it is appropriate for a court to stay discovery until a pending motion is decided "where the case is likely to be finally concluded as a result of the ruling thereon; where the facts sought through uncompleted discovery would not affect the resolution of the motion; or where discovery on all issues of the broad complaint would be wasteful and burdensome." Id. (citing Kutilek v. Gannon, 132 F.R.D. 296, 297-98 (D.Kan. 1990)).
The Court also finds a stay to be appropriate given that the motions raise issues as to judicial immunity, prosecutorial immunity, and Eleventh Amendment immunity. Generally speaking, defendants are entitled to have questions of immunity resolved before being required to engage in discovery and other pretrial proceedings. Siegert v. Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 232-33, 111 S.Ct. 1789, 1793, 114 L.Ed.2d 277 (1991). "One of the purposes of immunity . . . is to spare a defendant not only unwarranted liability, but unwarranted demands customarily imposed upon those defending a long drawn out lawsuit." Id., 500 U.S. at 232. The Supreme Court has made it clear that until the threshold question of immunity is resolved, discovery should not be allowed. Id. at 233; Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818, 102 S.Ct. 2727, 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982)).
For the reasons cited above, Defendants' motions for stay, protective order, and related relief (doc. 21, 23 and 26) are granted in their entirety. All Rule 26 proceedings, discovery, and pretrial proceedings are hereby stayed pending resolution of Defendants' motions to dismiss.
IT IS SO ORDERED.