Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Foster v. State

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division

March 28, 2018

CHRISTOPHER FOSTER, Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF OHIO, et al., Defendants.

          Black, J.

          MEMORANDUM OPINON AND ORDER

          STEPHANIE K. BOWMAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Plaintiff is a frequent filer in this Court, both of cases and of numerous (and lengthy) handwritten single-spaced motions within each of those cases, including this one.[1] The undersigned has filed a Report and Recommendation this same day that addresses pending dispositive motions. This additional Memorandum Opinion and Order addresses seven currently pending non-dispositive motions, all but one of which has been filed by Plaintiff.

         I. Pending Non-Dispositive Motions

         Motion to Stay Discovery (Doc. 84) and Motion to Seek Denial of Stay of Discovery (Doc. 87)

         The only non-dispositive motion filed by Defendants is a motion seeking to stay all discovery until this Court's resolution of a pending motion for judgment on the pleadings. Discovery in this case was previously scheduled to conclude on March 15, 2018, but does not appear to have been completed. The undersigned will deny Defendants' motion as moot in light of the R&R filed this day, which also clarifies the limited claims on which discovery may proceed. In order to expedite the resolution of this case and provide both parties a full and fair opportunity to complete discovery on those claims, this Order extends the existing pretrial deadlines.

         In lieu of filing any response in opposition to Defendants' motion to stay discovery, Plaintiff filed a counter-motion seeking an order denying the stay, as well as a “combined request to submit an advisory to the defendants to fully quash the apparent confusion of this matter's purpose.” (Doc. 87). Plaintiff's motion seeks denial of the stay to avoid undue delay, and because he believes that Defendants' pending motion for judgment on the pleadings is without merit. Plaintiff's counter-motion also will be denied as moot.

         Motion to Supplement (Doc. 88) to Add To Respectfully Exhibited Advisory Requested to Be Presented to Defendants To Shed Light On Their Apparent Misinterpretation of this Good Faith Litigation - Brief Narrative/Addition Attached

         This motion will be denied as largely redundant of Plaintiff's motion to seek denial of the stay of discovery.

         Motion for Return of Documents (Doc. 92)

         Plaintiff seeks a free copy of “the original Exhibits attached to this prisoner affidavit herein, along with a copy of the action docket for this case.” In the same motion, Plaintiff requests a copy of the docket sheet for another one of Plaintiff's cases. This motion will be denied because in forma pauperis status does not entitle a litigant to free copies.

         Motion for Entering New Evidence - Exhibits In Support of Relief of Order on Basis of Danger and of Necessary Injunction Proved. (Doc. 93)

         Plaintiff previously has been advised that this Court will not enter ad hoc “evidence” in the record. The motion to enter evidence is therefore denied. To the extent that Plaintiff seeks reconsideration of this Court's prior denial of his motion for injunctive relief, the motion is redundant and addressed in the R&R filed this day.

         Motion for the U.S. Marshal to Serve the Defendant on The Class ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.