Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Madison Marshall, III, Plaintiff, Pro Se.
James Pohlmann, Defendant, represented by Mary Ann Hand , Gutierrez & Hand & Salvador E. Gutierrez, Jr. , Gutierrez & Hand.
KAREN WELLS ROBY, Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court is a Motion to Retrieve Evidence from Defendant (R. Doc. 14) filed by pro se Plaintiff Madison Marshall. Marshall has filed the instant motion "requesting all information to subpoena witnesses or Plaintiff to this case." R. Doc. 14., p. 1. In reading the motion, the Court understands Marshall to be seeking discovery from the Defendant. As such, the Court denies Marshall's motion as procedurally improper. See Powell v. United States, No. 09-1873, 2009 WL 5184338 at *1 (E.D. La. Dec. 22, 2009). While pro se plaintiffs are afforded a certain amount of leeway, "[a] pro se litigant is not exempt from compliance with relevant rules of procedural and substantive law." Stinson v. Edwards, No. 12-404, 2013 WL 3783976, at *5 (E.D. La. July 18, 2013) (citing Birl v. Estelle, 660 F.2d 592, 593 (5th Cir. 1981) and Beard v. Experian Info. Solutions Inc., 214 F. App'x 459, 462 (5th Cir. 2007)). As such, Marshall "should pursue the information he seeks by serving discovery requests on the [the Defendant] in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of this Court." Powell, 2009 WL 5184338 at *1; see also, Fed. R. Civ. P. 26-37.
IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant's Motion to Retrieve Evidence from Defendant (R. Doc. 14) is DENIED.