Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

TAREYAN COOKS,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 4:02-cv-00423-SPM-AK

G R BRANNEN,

et al,

Defendants.

___________________________/

O R D E R 

Presently before the Court are the following discovery requests filed by Plaintiff: 

(1) Request for Admissions (doc. 89); (2) Request for Production of Documents (doc.

90); (3) Interrogatories to Defendant Michael Rathmann (doc. 91); and (4) Additional

Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents (doc. 92). By Order dated

September 18, 2006, Plaintiff was instructed that he must first obtain leave of Court

before serving discovery. (Doc. 83). Thus, these requests will be construed as motions

for discovery and the Court makes the following determinations:

The Request for Admissions (doc. 89) will be deemed served on the Defendants

and the time within which a response is to be made shall begin to run from this date. 

Request for Production of Documents No. 1 is denied as overly broad. Plaintiff

seeks policies on “staff supervision of inmates at Columbia Correctional Institution,” and

as written this request could encompass numerous and irrelevant documents. 

Request for Production of Documents No. 2 shall be construed as a request for

copies of the DOC policy on “staff responses to inmate on inmate threats” and as so

Case 4:02-cv-00423-SPM-AK Document 94 Filed 11/13/06 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

Case No: 4:02-cv-00423-SPM-AK

construed shall be deemed served on Defendants on this date and the time within which

to respond to said request shall begin to run from this date.

Request No. 3 shall be deemed served on Defendants on this date and the time

within which to respond to said request shall begin to run from this date.

Request No. 4 is overly broad and is denied. 

Request No. 5 is overly broad and is denied. Plaintiff is not entitled to another

inmate’s file.

Request No. 6 is overly broad and is denied.

Request No. 7 is overly broad and is denied.

Request No. 8 is overly broad, irrelevant, and is denied.

Michael Rathmann is no longer a party to this cause and therefore no

interrogatories may be served upon him. He was not a named defendant in the Third

Amended Complaint. (See Doc. 19). Thus, insofar as Plaintiff seeks leave to serve

these interrogatories (doc. 91), the request is denied.

Plaintiff’s request to serve additional interrogatories and requests for production

of documents shall be GRANTED, except that Request No. 6 shall be construed as

requesting the procedures for using a chemical agent on an inmate housed in a cell with

another inmate, but the first part of the request shall be ignored since it does not make

any sense.

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to serve Requests for Admissions (doc. 89) is

Case 4:02-cv-00423-SPM-AK Document 94 Filed 11/13/06 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

Case No: 4:02-cv-00423-SPM-AK

GRANTED, and the requests are deemed served on this date.

2. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to serve Requests for Production of Documents

(doc. 90) is GRANTED IN PART as to Request Nos. 2 and 3, as herein construed, and

the time within which to respond shall begin to run from this date.

3. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to serve interrogatories upon Michael Rathmann

(doc. 91) is DENIED.

4. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to serve Additional Interrogatories and Requests for

Production of Documents (doc. 92) is GRANTED, with the construction herein given to

No. 6, and the interrogatories/requests are deemed served on this date.

DONE AND ORDERED this 13TH day of November, 2006

s/ A. KORNBLUM 

ALLAN KORNBLUM 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 4:02-cv-00423-SPM-AK Document 94 Filed 11/13/06 Page 3 of 3