Owens et al v. State of Alabama Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation et al

Filing 129

ORDERED as follows: (1) the defendants' request to be able to file rebuttal designations to plaintiffs' deposition designations, contained within document 98 is granted; (2) the defendants' 111 114 115 116 117 118 objecti ons to plaintiffs' deposition designations are overruled to the extent that they raise objections based on the complete deposition answer not being designated by the plaintiffs; (3) the plaintiffs need only respond to the defendants' objections to deposition designations by the court's deadline of 10/20/08 to the extent the defendants object on grounds other than that the entire answer was not designated. Signed by Honorable W. Harold Albritton, III on 10/15/08. (sl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION JOAN FAULK OWENS and KAREN LYNN HUBBARD, ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) v. ) ) STATE OF ALABAMA DEPT. OF ) MENTAL HEALTH AND MENTAL ) RETARDATION; JOHN HOUSTON, etc.; ) OTHA DILLIHAY, etc.; HENRY R. ) ERVIN, etc.; and MARILYN BENSON, etc.,) ) ) Defendants. ) ORDER Upon consideration of pending matters in this case, it appears to the court that many of the objections by the Defendants to deposition designations of the Plaintiffs would be resolved if the Defendants were allowed to designate rebuttal depositions to complete deposition answers. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The Defendants' request to be able to file rebuttal designations to Plaintiffs' deposition designations, contained within document #98, is GRANTED. Defendants indicated that such designations could be filed within 24 hours, therefore, the Defendants are given until October 17 to file such rebuttal deposition designations. 2. The Defendants' Objections to Plaintiffs' Deposition Designations (Doc. #111, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118) are OVERRULED to the extent that they raise objections based on the complete deposition answer not being designated by the Plaintiffs. 3. The Plaintiffs need only respond to the Defendants' objections to deposition designations by the court's deadline of October 20, 2008 to the extent the Defendants object on

Civil Action No. 2:07cv650-WHA (WO)

grounds other than that the entire answer was not designated.

Done this 15th day of October, 2008.

/s/ W. Harold Albritton W. HAROLD ALBRITTON SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE