IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
July 14, 2006
MARKUS HUNTER, PLAINTIFF,
GEORGE C. WELBORN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Proud, Magistrate Judge
Before the Court is plaintiff's motion for leave to serve additional interrogatories on the defendants, because an amended complaint has been filed. (Doc. 71). The Court construes the motion as seeking leave to reopen the period for discovery, and for leave to serve more than the 25 interrogatories allotted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(a). Defendants Welborn, Ramsey, Elder, Bonifield, Ellis, Johnston, Nix, Jordan and Taylor do not object to plaintiff being permitted to conduct discovery relative to the newly added defendants and claims, but they object to reopening discovery regarding the other matters that have already been the object of discovery. (Doc. 75).
The defendants' objection is well taken. There is no cause for reopening discovery, or permitting discovery that should have been completed long ago. Consequently, additional discovery will be permitted only as to the newly added defendants, Charles Hinsley and C/O Harner.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff's motion (Doc. 71) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; discovery is reopened through August 31, 2006, for the sole purpose of permitting discovery relative to the newly added defendants Charles Hinsley and C/O Harner; dispositive motions relative to Hinsley and Harner only may be filed by September 29, 2006. NO further extensions will be granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
CLIFFORD J. PROUD U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.