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
ORDER

On 13 June 2001 (Doe. # 105), the plaintiffs filed, in one pleading, a Motion to Compel Initial Disclosures and Discovery, a Motion to Compel Compliance With Scheduling Order, a Motion For Sanctions, and a Motion for Expedited Hearing. Upon consideration of the motions, and for good cause, it is


ORDERED that the motions are DENIED. The court notes, with appreciation for the plaintiffs' position, the argument that the passage of time could prejudice the plaintiffs if the existing scheduling order continues to bind the parties. The court recognizes, however, that because of its rulings, the parties have not engaged in discovery, and the substantial pending matters before this court has prevented any further substantive rulings.

Accordingly, to the extent that the court's issuance of a ruling on the applicability of the defense of qualified immunity delays the parties' discovery, the court will consider the parties' motions to amend the scheduling order. The parties should delay any effort to modify the scheduling order, however, until such time as a final ruling on the issue of qualified immunity is entered.

DONE this 19th day of June, 2001.
VANZETTA PEN MCPHERSON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Back to Lawsuit Page

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