BROGAN v. FIN AND FEATHERS

M.D. Georgia

BROGAN v. FIN AND FEATHERS

DecidedApril 11, 2025

Docket7:24-cv-00127

StatusUnknown

This text of BROGAN v. FIN AND FEATHERS (BROGAN v. FIN AND FEATHERS) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

BROGAN v. FIN AND FEATHERS, (M.D. Ga. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA VALDOSTA DIVISION

MICHELLE BROGAN, : : Plaintiff, : v. : CASE NO.: 7:24-CV-00127 (WLS) : FIN & FEATHERS, et al., : : Defendants. : : ORDER Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 8). Based on a preliminary review of the Motion, the Court finds there is a reasonable probability that the Motion will be granted or substantially narrow the issues. The Court therefore finds good cause for a stay of discovery. See Chudasama v. Mazda Motor Corp., 123 F.3d 1353, 1368 (11th Cir. 1997) (“[W]hen faced with a motion to dismiss a claim for relief that significantly enlarges the scope of discovery, the district court should rule on the motion before entering discovery orders, if possible.”). As a result, Discovery is sua sponte STAYED pending the resolution of the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 8).

SO ORDERED, this 11th day of April 2025.

/s/ W. Louis Sands W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA VALDOSTA DIVISION

MICHELLE BROGAN, : : Plaintiff, : v. : CASE NO.: 7:24-CV-00127 (WLS) : FIN & FEATHERS, et al., : : Defendants. : : ORDER Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 8). Based on a preliminary review of the Motion, the Court finds there is a reasonable probability that the Motion will be granted or substantially narrow the issues. The Court therefore finds good cause for a stay of discovery. See Chudasama v. Mazda Motor Corp., 123 F.3d 1353, 1368 (11th Cir. 1997) (“[W]hen faced with a motion to dismiss a claim for relief that significantly enlarges the scope of discovery, the district court should rule on the motion before entering discovery orders, if possible.”). As a result, Discovery is sua sponte STAYED pending the resolution of the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 8).

SO ORDERED, this 11th day of April 2025.

/s/ W. Louis Sands W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

BROGAN v. FIN AND FEATHERS, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brogan-v-fin-and-feathers-gamd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack