Evans v. Eisen

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California strikes the plaintiff’s filing labeled “Motion to Clarify” because it consists of an unauthorized reply to an answer and improperly filed discovery materials. The court explains that replies to answers require court authorization and that discovery requests and responses generally must not be filed unless required by rule or ordered by the court.

Holdings

1. A reply to an answer is not contemplated unless the court orders a reply; therefore, plaintiff's reply was an unauthorized filing.
2. Discovery requests and responses generally must not be filed with the court until they are used in the proceeding or the court orders filing, subject to applicable rules and court orders.
3. The notice and attachments filed at ECF No. 26 are stricken.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a plaintiff may file a reply to an answer without an order from the court authorizing a reply.
2. Whether discovery requests and responses may be filed with the court before they are used in the proceeding or the court orders their filing.
3. Whether the unauthorized filing and its attachments should be stricken.

Disposition

other