Plummer et al v. Terex Corporation et al

Filing 102

ORDER pursuant to the telephone conference held today, the Plummers' recent 30(b)(6) notice and amended notice of deposition are quashed without prejudice. Terex should provide a responsive affidavit that goes the extra mile as soon as practicable. If the parties remain in disagreement, the Court will consider a 30(b)(6) deposition at some mutually convenient date in May, notwithstanding the close of discovery at the end of April. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 4/25/2014. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
EASTERN DIVISION
JOHN PLUMMER and
DEZIRIE PLUMMER
v.

PLAINTIFFS
No. 2:12-cv-192-DPM

TEREX SOUTH DAKOTA, INC.,
ffk/a TEREX-TELECT

DEFENDANT

FORMERLY FORESTRY, INC.

CROSS-CLAIMANT

v.
TEREX CORPORATION;
TEREX USA, LLC; TEREX
UTILITIES, INC.; TEREX SOUTH
DAKOTA, INC. ffk/a TEREX-TELECT

CROSS-DEFENDANTS

ORDER
For the reasons stated on the record at the end of today' s telephone
conference, the Plummers' recent 30(b)(6) notice and amended notice of
deposition are quashed without prejudice. Terex should provide a responsive
affidavit that goes the extra mile as soon as practicable. If the parties remain
in disagreement thereafter, the Court will consider a focused, clean-up
30(b)(6)

deposition

at

some

mutually

convenient

notwithstanding the close of discovery at the end of April.

date

in

May,

So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr.
United States District Judge

-2-