Curtis Snowden, III v. A. Scott, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California grants defendants Scott and Jones’s motion to compel responses to discovery requests in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The court orders plaintiff to respond within fifteen days, awards $285 in discovery-related expenses, and stays enforcement of the fee assessment pending a showing of plaintiff’s ability to pay.

Holdings

1. Under Local Rule 230(l), plaintiff's failure to respond to the motion to compel or show good cause for his untimely response constituted a waiver of opposition.
2. The motion to compel was granted, and plaintiff was ordered to respond to Jones's interrogatories and Scott's request for production of documents within fifteen days.
3. Defendants Scott and Jones were entitled to $285 in reasonable expenses incurred in preparing the motion to compel, notwithstanding plaintiff's pro se status.
4. Enforcement of the $285 expense award was stayed because plaintiff was proceeding in forma pauperis, subject to defendants' ability to move to lift the stay upon a showing that plaintiff could pay.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiff's failure to oppose the motion to compel and comply with the order to show cause constituted a waiver of opposition under Local Rule 230(l).
2. Whether defendants were entitled to an order compelling plaintiff to respond to the discovery requests.
3. Whether defendants were entitled to recover $285 in reasonable expenses incurred in preparing the motion to compel.
4. Whether enforcement of the expense award should be stayed because plaintiff was proceeding in forma pauperis.

Disposition

other