Case Activity (487)

1. Misc | Filed: June 15, 2026 | Entered: June 16, 2026 Abendroth v. Kaskaskia Medical Center, LTD et al

   P.I.: Other | Illinois Southern

   Supplement

   SUPPLEMENT by Tyler C. Abendroth.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(djw)

2. Order | Filed: May 29, 2026 | Entered: May 29, 2026 Abendroth v. Kaskaskia Medical Center, LTD et al

   P.I.: Other | Illinois Southern

   Order ~Util - Terminate Motions

   ORDER. Plaintiff's 9 Emergency Motion for Preservation and Subpoena of Electronically Stored Information (ESI) from Fayette County Circuit Court is Denied without prejudice. The Motion does not state with particularity the grounds for the requested order, as required by Rule 7(b)(1)(B). To the extent that Plaintiff seeks a preservation order or litigation hold, the motion identifies no specific facts, affidavit, verified allegations, retention policy, prior loss or destruction, or other nonconclusory basis showing a significant risk that relevant ESI will be lost absent court intervention. To the extent Plaintiff seeks emergency injunctive relief against parties or nonparties, Plaintiff has not made the specific factual showing required under Rule 65(b)(1)(A), has not satisfied Rule 65(b)(1)(B)'s notice-certification requirement to the extent relief is sought without notice, and has not proposed relief satisfying Rule 65(d)(1)'s specificity requirements or Rule 65(d)(2)'s limits on persons bound. To the extent Plaintiff seeks issuance or enforcement of subpoenas, Plaintiff has not shown that discovery is presently authorized under Rule 26(d)(1), has not shown good cause for expedited discovery, and has not demonstrated compliance with Rule 45(d)'s various procedural requirements for undue-burden protections. In particular, Rule 45 permits a subpoena to command production, but it does not authorize the requested immediate transmission of discovery materials directly to the Court's docket. This Order does not relieve any party of the preservation obligations imposed by the Federal Rules or other applicable law. Plaintiff is instructed that to the extent that parties are on notice of pending litigation, they are obliged to retain pertinent evidence. Plaintiff is further advised that this case has yet to be screened, and discovery-related motions at this stage are premature. Signed by Judge David W. Dugan on 5/29/2026. (dmw2) THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.

3. 485 additional result(s)