Defendants' Objections to Scheduling Order

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

JAMES R. BLACKSTON,
BRADLEY W. BARBER
Plaintiffs,

vs.

STATE OF ALABAMA, et. al.,
Defendants. )
)
)
)
)
)
) Case No.: 99-A-295-N

NON-PARTY RESPONSE OF BOB BRADFORD AND LOIS BRASFIELD TO

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Come now non-parties Bob Bradford and Lois Brasfield, ⁽¹⁾ by and through undersigned counsel, to respond to the Court's Order to Show Cause dated March 13, 2002, and as grounds show the following:

1. On March 20, 2000, the Defendants filed a Motion to Stay Discovery Pending a Ruling on Absolute and Qualified Immunity. The Court granted said Motion on March 31, 2000 (Doc. #53).

2. On August 14, 2001 and August 16, 2001, the Plaintiffs served discovery on Bob Bradford, Director of Finance for the Administrative Office of Courts and Lois Brasfield, an attorney for the Department of Human Resources, respectively. During this time, both of these individuals were state employees.

3. Ms. Brasfield and a representative on Mr. Bradford's behalf contacted undersigned counsel about the Plaintiff's discovery requests. Undersigned counsel notified them that discovery had been stayed in the case. Based on the Plaintiffs' discovery requests, it appeared to undersigned counsel that the Plaintiffs were attempting to circumvent the stay of discovery that had been granted in the case, in order to obtain information related to the instant action from the non-parties.

4. Undersigned counsel informed the non-parties that she would file a Motion for Clarification to address the matter. She noted that the Plaintiffs had sued the State of Alabama, and as state officials, they were covered by the Defendants assertion of sovereign immunity in this case.

5. On September 14, 2001, undersigned counsel filed the Motion for Clarification (Doc. #112), which referenced Mr. Bradford's and Ms. Brasfield's receipt of the Plaintiffs' discovery and the Defendants' objections to it. In said Motion, the Defendants requested that the Court order the Plaintiffs to end all discovery efforts until the Court has ruled on the Defendants' pending immunity issues.

6. On March 13, 2002, the Court granted the Defendants' Motion for Clarification (Doc. # 120).

7. On March 27, 2002, the Defendants filed an objection to the Court's Scheduling Order because there has not yet been a ruling on the Defendants assertion of immunity in this case.

8. Thus, state official Bob Bradford and former state official Lois Brasfield should not be required to respond to any discovery from the Plaintiffs until the Defendants immunity issues have been decided.

Footnote 1. Undersigned counsel represents these non-parties in this action for the purpose of this response only. Further, Lois Brasfield, a former attorney for the Department of Human Resources has retired.

Back to Lawsuit Page

[ Home]---[Search]---[Email]---[Access Page]---[Child Support]