Prevost v. City of Houston

District Court, S.D. Texas·Decided February 18, 2025·No. 4:23-cv-04115·Unknown

Opinion

February 18, 2025 Nathan Ochsner, Clerk UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

VALERIE PREVOST, § CIVIL ACTION NO Plaintiff, § 4:23-cv-04115 § § vs. § JUDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE § § CITY OF HOUSTON, § Defendant. § ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a complaint against Defendant City of Houston on October 19, 2023. Dkt 1. The matter was referred for pretrial management to Magistrate Judge Christina A. Bryan. Dkt 4. Pending are objections by Plaintiff to four non- dispositive orders issued by Judge Bryan. See Dkts 71 & 72. Plaintiff objects to: o The order of September 12, 2024 (i) denying reconsideration of the August 16, 2024 Order denying in part Plaintiff’s motion to compel, (ii) denying reconsideration of the August 16, 2024 Order striking Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint; and (iii) denying Plaintiff’s request for pre- motion conference. See Dkt 43. o The protective order of October 2, 2024, directing Plaintiff to communicate only with the City’s lawyers on matters regarding this case. See Dkt 48. o The order of November 19, 2024, granting an emergency protective order stopping the deposition of the City’s Inspector General. See Dkt 65. o The order of December 6, 2024, denying Plaintiffs motion to compel the deposition of the City’s Inspector General. See Dkt 68. The district court will set aside a non-dispositive order of a magistrate judge to which a party has specifically objected only if it is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. See FRCP 72(a) & 28 USC § 636(b)(1)(A); see also Castillo v Frank, 70 F3d 382, 385 (5th Cir 1995). Most of Plaintiffs objections are untimely, and all lack merit. No clear error appears upon review and consideration of the Orders, the record, and the applicable law. The objections by Plaintiff to the Memorandum and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are overruled. Dkts 71 & 72. The Orders of the Magistrate Judge are ADOPTED as the Orders of this Court. Dkts 43, 48, 65 & 68. SO ORDERED. Signed on February 18, 2025, at Houston, Texas.

Z. Hon. Charles Eskridg United States District Judge

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

Prevost v. City of Houston, (S.D. Tex. 2025).

Prevost v. City of Houston (Prevost v. City of Houston) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related