Brown v. Swift Transportation Co of Arizona LLC et al

Filing 24

ORDER denying as moot 19 plaintiff Valarie Brown's motion to compel response to discovery requests. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 10/4/2019. (jbh)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION VALARIE BROWN v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 3:18-cv-00212-KGB SWIFT TRANSPORTATION CO. OF ARIZONA LLC, et al., DEFENDANTS ORDER Before the Court is plaintiff Valarie Brown’s motion to compel response to discovery requests (Dkt. No. 19). In her motion, Ms. Brown states that served defendants Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC (“Swift Transportation”) and Germaney M. Bates with the first set of interrogatories and requests for production of documents on April 2, 2019, and that defendants failed to answer them (Id.). In response to Ms. Brown’s motion, defendants admit that they were slow in responding to Ms. Brown’s two sets of interrogatories and requests for production of documents due in part to Mr. Bates’ unavailability due as a result of his employment in the oil fields and due in part to agreements for extension of time to respond (Dkt. No. 22, ¶ 1). Since Ms. Brown filed her motion to compel, defendants assert that they have responded to both sets of Ms. Brown’s written discovery requests and have provided Ms. Brown documentation which is responsive to her interrogatories and requests for production of documents (Id., ¶ 2). Since defendants have responded to and complied with Ms. Brown’s discovery requests, the Court denies as moot Ms. Brown’s motion to compel discovery requests (Dkt. No. 19). It is so ordered this 4th day of October, 2019. Kristine G. Baker 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?