Harmatz v. County of Charlotte, Florida
Harmatz v. County of Charlotte, Florida
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION
HUGO HARMATZ,
Plaintiff, Case No. 2:25-cv-342-SPC-KCD v.
COUNTY OF CHARLOTTE, FLORIDA, et al.,
Defendants, /
ORDER Pro se Plaintiff Hugo Harmatz moves to receive notices of electronic filing by email and to file documents electronically. (Doc. 19.) For the below reasons, the Motion is granted in part and denied in part. To the extent Plaintiff seeks leaves to access the Court’s electronic filing system (CM/ECF), the motion is denied. “Pro se litigants are generally denied access to electronic filing unless extenuating circumstances exist to justify waiving CM/ECF procedures.” Huminski v. Vermont, No. 2:13-cv-692- FtM-29,
2014 WL 169848, *4 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 15, 2014); see also McMahon v. Cleveland Clinic Found. Police Dep’t,
455 F. App’x 874, 878(11th Cir. 2011) (affirming denial of CM/ECF access for pro se litigants). No extenuating circumstances have been shown (or even argued) here. To the extent Plaintiff believes electronic filing will help him access documents in the case, he can already submit materials electronically through the Web Portal on the Court’s website: https://www.flmd. uscourts.gov/electronic-document- submission-web-portal. Plaintiffs request to receive notices of electronic filing via email is granted. The Clerk is directed to add Plaintiff's email ([email protected]) to the docket and send all future notices of electronic filing to this email address. Plaintiff must frequently check his email as some filings could be time sensitive. ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on July 11, 2025.
Pc □□ ce Le gee byte ile? * Kale C. Dudek United States Magistrate Judge
Reference
- Status
- Unknown