UNITED STATES
v.
ZASTROW
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The District Court addressed two motions filed by pro se defendant Kenneth Scott in a civil action. The court denied Scott's discovery motion for improper filing procedures and granted his request for additional time to prepare a counterclaim or amend his answer.
The court denied Scott's discovery motion because discovery requests must be served on opposing counsel, not filed with the court, and local rules prohibit filing discovery documents absent specific circumstances. The court granted Scott's request for additional time, allowing him until September 23, 2024 to file any counterclaim or amended answer.
[1] Discovery requests must be served on opposing counsel, not the Court.
[2] Under local rules, discovery documents should not be filed unless used at a hearing or trial, necessary for a motion, or ordered by the court.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Discovery requests must be served on opposing counsel, not the Court.”
Establishes the proper procedure for discovery in civil litigation and explains why Scott's motion was procedurally defective.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKenneth Scott is a pro se defendant in a civil action along with Calvin Zastrow, Chester Gallagher, Eva Zastrow, and Katelyn Sims. Scott filed two mot…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Local Court Rules cases and more on FLexlaw
Before the Court are two motions filed by pro se Defendant Kenneth Scott. (Docs. 26, 28.) The first includes several discovery requests directed to the United States. (Doc. 26.) But Plaintiff need not file a motion for discovery, so his request is DENIED. See Jones v. Hayes, No. 119CV03997WMRCMS, 2021 WL 12188901, at *1 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 11, 2021). Discovery requests must be served on opposing counsel, not the Court. Furthermore, under this Court's local rules, discovery should not be filed unless the document is used at a hearing or trial, is necessary for a motion, or the Court orders otherwise. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d)(1)(A); Middle District Discovery Handbook (2021) at Section I.C.1.
The second motion is a request for additional time “to prepare for a Counter Lawsuit” and “to add additional Exhibits.” (Doc. 28.) Scott has already answered the amended complaint. (Doc. 13.) His request for more time will be GRANTED, and if Scott wishes to assert a counterclaim, or otherwise amend his answer, he must do so by September 23, 2024.
A couple final issues merit attention. Before filing motions, Scott must confer with opposing counsel and denote her (or his) position with respect to the relief sought. Any renewed motion must indicate in its Rule 3.01(g) certification the manner of conferral and any agreements reached. Failure to do so in the future may result in the motion being summarily denied. And Scott should refrain from including any fantastical allegations or rhetoric in his filings. See Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 536-37 (1974) (“[F]ederal courts are without power to entertain claims if they are so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit, wholly insubstantial, [or] obviously frivolous.”).
ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on August 22, 2024.
Kyle C. Dudek United States Magistrate Judge
Copies: All Parties of Record
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Zastrow, 2021 WL 12188901 (M.D. Fla. 2024)…Defendant Kenneth Scott. (Docs. 26, 28.) The first includes several discovery requests directed to the United States. (Doc. 26.) But Plaintiff need not file a motion for discovery, so his request is DENIED. See Jones v. Hayes, No. 119CV03997WMRCMS, 2021 WL 12188901, at *1 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 11, 2021). Discovery requests must be served on opposing counsel, not the Court. Furthermore, under this Court's local rules, discovery should not be filed unless the document is used at a hearing or trial, is necessary for a m…
Authorities Cited
- United States v. Zastrow, 2021 WL 12188901 (M.D. Fla. 2024)