State of Ohio v. Brock

District Court, S.D. Ohio

State of Ohio v. Brock

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION STATE OF OHIO, : Case No. 3:25-cv-00021 Plaintiff, : District Judge Thomas M. Rose v. : Magistrate Judge Peter B. Silvain, Jr. WILLIAM J. BROCK : Defendant. :

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Non-P arty Movant Elena Iatarola’s Motion (ECF No. 6) to Stay Bri efing on the Pending Motion to Quash. Consistent with Landis v. N. Am. Co.,

299 U.S. 248, 254

,

57 S. Ct. 163, 166

(1936), the Motion

(ECF No. 6) is GRANTED. Briefing on Non-Party Movant’s original Motion (ECF No. 2) is therefore STAYED, provided that Non-Party Movant may move this Court to lift the stay if Defendant Brock or the state court take further action to enforce or attempt to enforce the subpoena, so that briefing on the pending Motion (ECF No. 2) may continue as appropriate. The parties are ORDERED to file a status report in thirty (30) days if they

have not filed a voluntary dismissal. IT IS SO ORDERED. February 19, 2025 s_/__P_e_t_er_ _B_._ S__il_v_a_i_n_,_ J_r_.________ Peter B. Silvain, Jr. United States Magistrate Judge

Reference

Status
Unknown