Goodwin v. Vander

• Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
• Decided: January 26, 2024
• Docket: 8:21-cv-00417
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

VIOLET GOODWIN,

Plaintiff, 8:21-CV-417

vs. ORDER

VANDER, et al.,

Defendants.

The plaintiff has filed an "appeal" (filing 121) that the Court construes as an objection to the Magistrate Judge's order (filing 117) denying the plaintiff's discovery motion.1 The Court will overrule the plaintiff's objection. First, the objection was untimely. The Magistrate Judge's order was entered on December 26, and the deadline for objecting to a Magistrate Judge's order is 14 days. NECivR 72.2(a). But the plaintiff's objection is also without substantive merit. A district court may reconsider a magistrate judge's ruling on nondispositive pretrial matters only where it has been shown that the ruling is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A); Ferguson v. United States, 484 F.3d 1068, 1076 (8th Cir. 2007). The Magistrate Judge's order here was neither. See U.S. Marshals Serv. v. Means, 741 F.2d 1053, 1056 (8th Cir. 1984) (28 U.S.C. § 1915 does not authorize government payment of witness fees and expenses for indigent litigants); Lewis v. Precision Optics, Inc., 612 F.2d 1074, 1076 (8th Cir. 1980) (neither defendant nor government responsible for payment of expenses at the district court level). Accordingly,

1 The Court construed the filing as an objection because discovery orders generally aren't appealable. See Tenkku v. Normandy Bank, 218 F.3d 926, 927 (8th Cir. 2000). IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff's objection (filing 121) is overruled.

Dated this 26th day of January, 2024.

BY THE COURT:

Jdiin M. Gerrard Sphior United States District Judge