Haukereid v. National Passenger Railroad Corporation

Filing 60

ORDER directing the parties to send no more letters to Chambers regarding discovery disputes. A Joint Report on the issues about written discovery on other incidents due by July 28. The Court will hold a hearing on all the current discovery issues on Friday, 1 August 2014 at 2:30 p.m. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 7/24/2014. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment No. 1 - Amtrak Letter, # 2 Attachment No. 2 - Haukereid Letter, # 3 Attachment No. 3 - Amtrak Response Letter)(jak)

711 WEST THIRD STREET
LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201
501-396-5400
FAX: [phone]

JAMES BRUCE McMATH
SAMUEL E. LEDBETTER
WILL BOND
NEIL CHAMBERLIN
CHARLES D. HARRISON
CARTER C. STEIN
ROSS NOLAND

McMath Wuntls P.A.

www.mcmathlaw.com

CARTER C. STEIN
Direct No. 501-396-5409
MART VEHIK, OF COUNSEL
PHILLIP H. McMATH, OF COUNSEL

[e-mail]

ANGEL DORSEY
Paralegal
501-396-5444

SIDNEY S. McMATH (1912-2003)
LELAND LEATHERMAN (1915-2006)
HENRY WOODS (1918-2002)
WINSLOW DRUMMOND (1933-2005)

[e-mail]

July 23, 2014

Via E-Mail 011lv
Hon. D. P. Marshall Jr.
600 West Capitol Avenue, Room B155
Little Rock, AR 72201
RE:

Scott Haukereid, Individually and as Personal Representative and Administrator of the Estate of
Andrew Haukereid, Jr., deceased v. National Railroad Passenger Cotporation, t!d/b/a Amtrak
USDC, Eastern District of AR, Jonesboro Division; Case No. 3:13-CV-00092 DPMIBD

Dear Judge Marshall:
In its December 13,2013, Order (ECF Doc. #30), the Court overruled Amtrak's objection to
Haukereid's Interrogatory 16 and Request for Production 16 and ordered Amtrak to "produce the
investigation reports for every incident involving a passenger who fell out of a door while a train was
between stops." Despite Haukereid's requests, Amtrak has refused to produce investigation reports or
descriptions of incidents for fourteen prior incidents.
For seven prior incidents, Amtrak denies having a responsive police investigation report and
refuses to provide a "description ofthe incident" as requested by Interrogatory 16. Haukereid believes
Amtrak too narrowly interprets the Com1's Order.
For the other seven prior incidents, Amtrak states the passengers "did not exit through a door"
and the incidents fall outside the Court's Order. Haukereid believes Amtrak will tell the Court these
seven passengers exited a moving train through a window. However, the windows are within the exit
doors. Haukereid believes Amtrak too narrowly interprets the Court's Order.
Due to the tight time line, Haukereid requests a short telephone conference with the Court to
discuss prior incidents.

CCS/ad
cc:

Scott Tucker
Kristopher B. Knox

(via email only)
(via email only)

Since 1953, a tradition oflegal excellence.