Hunt v. 21st Mortgage Corporation

Filing 15

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re 12 MOTION to Compel Discovery Responses from Defendant; As a result of the hearing on July 8, 2018, the court hereby ORDERS as set out within; The scheduling order entered on November 5, 2012, is AMENDED to extend the discovery cutoff to August 2, 2013. Signed by Judge William M Acker, Jr on 7/10/13. (SAC )

Download PDF
FILED 2013 Jul-10 PM 04:00 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION CHARLES HUNT, } } } } } } } } } Plaintiff, v. 21ST MORTGAGE CORPORATION, Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. 12-AR-2697-S MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The motion to compel filed by plaintiff, Charles Hunt, was heard on July 8, 2013. As a result of what was said by counsel and by the court, all of which was recorded by the court reporter, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The separate suit in this court entitled Amelia Hunt v. 21st Mortgage Corporation, which was terminated on October 19, 2012, is something of which this court can take judicial knowledge, but unless the parties in the above-styled case agree to the admissibility of evidence acquired in that case, the right of access to discovery materials in this case will depend entirely on the procedures in this case. 2. The motion to compel insofar as it refers to Interrogatories Nos. 16, 17, and 23 is MOOT. 3. taken. Defendant’s objection to Interrogatory No. 25 is well Unless plaintiff’s consented and neighbors to being until and plaintiff relatives contacted and designates who may called on the names of or may not have their cellular telephones, plaintiff’s motion to compel a response to Interrogatory No. 25 is DENIED. 4. are well Defendant’s objections to Interrogatories Nos. 7 and 8 taken. Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion to compel responses to Interrogatories Nos. 7 and 8 are, except to the extent already answered, DENIED. 5. With respect to Interrogatory No. 2, defendant having stated that it “will comply with the requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(5)(A)”, it shall do so within fourteen (14) days. Otherwise, defendant’s objections to Interrogatory No. 2 are well taken, and plaintiff’s motion to compel is DENIED. 6. Plaintiff’s motion to compel a complete response to Interrogatory No. 25 is DENIED, but will be reconsidered when and if plaintiff furnishes defendant the names of plaintiff’s neighbors and relatives who may or may not have consented to being contacted and called on their cellular telephones. The scheduling order entered on November 5, 2012, is hereby AMENDED to extend the discovery cutoff from July 19, 2013, to August 2, 2013. DONE this 10th day of July, 2013. _____________________________ WILLIAM M. ACKER, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?