From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fisher v. Lynch

United States District Court, D. Kansas
Feb 21, 2008
Civil Action No. 07-cv-2154-KHV-DJW (D. Kan. Feb. 21, 2008)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 07-cv-2154-KHV-DJW.

February 21, 2008


ORDER


On January 10, 2008, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Sanctions (doc. 60) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(f). Plaintiff's Motion alleges that Defendants failed to obey the Court's Scheduling Order. However, Plaintiff fails to assert in what way Defendants failed to obey the Scheduling Order.

Defendants Response (doc. 61) argues against sanctions noting Plaintiff's failure to make specific allegations or set forth facts supporting the Motion. Defendants also argue that sanction are improper because Plaintiff failed to identify any damages to him or the Court and failed to identify any delay to this case as a result of the alleged failure to obey the Scheduling Order. The Court agrees.

Defendants further request attorneys' fees in the amount of $200 for responding to a "groundless Motion." Because Plaintiff is representing himself pro se, the Court denies this request, however, Plaintiff is cautioned that further motions without a valid basis may subject him to sanctions. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion is denied because it fails to state a specific, valid claim for relief. The Court further denies Defendants' request for attorneys' fees.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Fisher v. Lynch

United States District Court, D. Kansas
Feb 21, 2008
Civil Action No. 07-cv-2154-KHV-DJW (D. Kan. Feb. 21, 2008)
Case details for

Fisher v. Lynch

Case Details

Full title:RAMON FISHER, Individually and as father and next friend of K.F.…

Court:United States District Court, D. Kansas

Date published: Feb 21, 2008

Citations

Civil Action No. 07-cv-2154-KHV-DJW (D. Kan. Feb. 21, 2008)