From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Plunkett v. Parham

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 8, 2022
2:19-cv-1450 KJM AC P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 8, 2022)

Opinion

2:19-cv-1450 KJM AC P

06-08-2022

CHARLES PLUNKETT, Plaintiff, v. C. PARHAM, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

ALLISON CLAIRE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action, has filed a motion requesting leave to call two inmate witnesses. ECF No. 39. The purpose of the motion is unclear, as this case is not currently scheduled for trial. No hearings are scheduled regarding any issues in this case. Assuming that plaintiff is seeking leave to call these witnesses at trial, the request is premature because it has not yet been determined that this case will proceed to trial.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for his witnesses to testify (ECF No. 39) is DENIED.


Summaries of

Plunkett v. Parham

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 8, 2022
2:19-cv-1450 KJM AC P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 8, 2022)
Case details for

Plunkett v. Parham

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES PLUNKETT, Plaintiff, v. C. PARHAM, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jun 8, 2022

Citations

2:19-cv-1450 KJM AC P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 8, 2022)