Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Jarrett v. Michigan Dept. of Corrections

United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division

February 3, 2015

CLARENCE JARRETT, Plaintiff,
v.
MICHIGAN DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL., Defendants.

Stephen J. Murphy, District Judge

ORDER

R. STEVEN WHALEN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Before the Court are Defendant Corizon Health, Inc.’s (“Corizon’s”) Motion to Quash Subpoena [Doc. #51] and the Michigan Department of Corrections [“MDOC”] Defendants’ Motion to Quash Subpoena [Doc. #52].

Fed.R.Civ.P. 45(a)(3) provides that a subpoena must be authorized by either the Clerk of the Court or an attorney authorized to practice in this Court. Neither of the subpoenas at issue in these motions is so authorized; rather, they are both signed by the Plaintiff.

I also note since both Corizon and the MDOC are parties, Rule 45 subpoenas are not the proper vehicles for discovery.

Accordingly, the motions to quash [Doc. #51 and Doc. #52] are GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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