Church Mutual Insurance Company v. Copenhaver et al

Filing 63

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 59 61 Motions for Reconsideration re 57 Order. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 4/20/10. (bkp)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION CHURCH MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY V. 4:09CV00487 JMM PLAINTIFF HAROLD R. COPENHAVER, JEFF W. O'DONNELL, and UNITED INSURANCE AGENCY INC. DEFENDANTS ORDER Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration and Supplemental Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's March 29, 2010 Order denying Plaintiff's Motion to Compel and granting the Defendants' Motion to Quash. In response to the pending motions, Defendants have conceded that they have no objection to removing the "Attorneys Eyes Only" restriction from the discovery documents they have produced to Plaintiff. (Response at p. 3.) This was an issue raised in Plaintiff's Motions. Therefore, the Court finds that the Motion for Reconsideration is GRANTED to the extent it applies the "Attorneys Eyes Only" restriction. As stated in the Court's previous Order, the discovery sought by the Plaintiff does not appear to be relevant to the issue of whether the noncompetion clause is enforceable in Arkansas. Therefore the Motions for Reconsideration (Docket # 59 and 61) are DENIED. The Court will entertain a motion for extension of the discovery and motion deadlines, if necessary, after the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment has been resolved. In conclusion, the Motions for Reconsideration (Docket # 59 and 61) are DENIED in part and GRANTED in part. IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of April, 2010. ______________________________ James M. Moody United States District Judge 2

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?