From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Trotter v. Kingston

United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Mar 1, 2006
Case No. 05-C-1032 (E.D. Wis. Mar. 1, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. 05-C-1032.

March 1, 2006


ORDER


Plaintiff David D. Trotter, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges that various defendants were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs when they sprayed chemical incapacitating agents on or near him and ignored his pleas for help. On February 24, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion to compel the production of documents (Docket #29) and a motion to compel answers to interrogatories (Docket #30). Neither motion includes a certification that plaintiff conferred with defendants' counsel in a good-faith attempt to secure disclosure, as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(2) and Civil L.R. 37.1. In fact, it appears that defendants' failure to respond to plaintiff's discovery requests resulted from an oversight. (Docket #32.) Because they lack the requisite certifications, plaintiff's motions to compel are DENIED, without prejudice.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Trotter v. Kingston

United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Mar 1, 2006
Case No. 05-C-1032 (E.D. Wis. Mar. 1, 2006)
Case details for

Trotter v. Kingston

Case Details

Full title:DAVID D. TROTTER, Plaintiff, v. PHIL KINGSTON, et al. Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin

Date published: Mar 1, 2006

Citations

Case No. 05-C-1032 (E.D. Wis. Mar. 1, 2006)