Gerald Hodges v. Jason Rhodes, et al.

N.D. Florida

Gerald Hodges v. Jason Rhodes, et al.

DecidedMay 5, 2026

Docket1:25-cv-00107

StatusUnknown

This text of Gerald Hodges v. Jason Rhodes, et al. (Gerald Hodges v. Jason Rhodes, et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gerald Hodges v. Jason Rhodes, et al., (N.D. Fla. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION

GERALD HODGES, Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 1:25cv107/MW/ZCB

JASON RHODES, et al., Defendants. ____________________________________/

ORDER

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action, has filed two motions requesting that his deposition be stayed. (Docs. 66, 67). The two motions will be denied for the same reasons explained in the Court’s prior order (Doc. 69)—namely, that Plaintiff has no constitutional right to appointed counsel and the Court has already authorized Plaintiff to be deposed under Rule 30(a)(2)(B). (See Doc. 69). Plaintiff is once again reminded that he must comply with requested discovery or else he may face sanctions including dismissal. See Amaechi v. Geico, No. 5:20cv442, 2022 WL 4134733, at *4-5 (M.D. Ga. Sept. 12, 2022) (noting that “pro se litigants must conform to procedural rules” and that failing to comply in discovery is grounds for sanctions including dismissal (cleaned up)), aff’d, No. 22-13450, 2024 WL 710546

(11th Cir. Feb. 21, 2024). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motions (Docs. 66, 67) are DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 5th day of May 2026. /s/ Zachary C. Bolitho Zachary C. Bolitho United States Magistrate Judge

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION

GERALD HODGES, Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 1:25cv107/MW/ZCB

JASON RHODES, et al., Defendants. ____________________________________/

ORDER

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action, has filed two motions requesting that his deposition be stayed. (Docs. 66, 67). The two motions will be denied for the same reasons explained in the Court’s prior order (Doc. 69)—namely, that Plaintiff has no constitutional right to appointed counsel and the Court has already authorized Plaintiff to be deposed under Rule 30(a)(2)(B). (See Doc. 69). Plaintiff is once again reminded that he must comply with requested discovery or else he may face sanctions including dismissal. See Amaechi v. Geico, No. 5:20cv442, 2022 WL 4134733, at *4-5 (M.D. Ga. Sept. 12, 2022) (noting that “pro se litigants must conform to procedural rules” and that failing to comply in discovery is grounds for sanctions including dismissal (cleaned up)), aff’d, No. 22-13450, 2024 WL 710546

(11th Cir. Feb. 21, 2024). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motions (Docs. 66, 67) are DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 5th day of May 2026. /s/ Zachary C. Bolitho Zachary C. Bolitho United States Magistrate Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Gerald Hodges v. Jason Rhodes, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gerald-hodges-v-jason-rhodes-et-al-flnd-2026.