Human Rights Defense Center v. Union County, Arkansas et al

Filing 81

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 69 Motion to Strike. Signed by Honorable Susan O. Hickey on January 30, 2023.(mll)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
EL DORADO DIVISION
HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENSE CENTER
v.

PLAINTIFF

Case No. 1:17-cv-1064

UNION COUNTY, ARKANSAS, et al.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike. ECF No. 69. Defendants have not
responded. The Court finds the matter ripe for consideration.
In the instant motion, Plaintiff seeks to have the Court strike Defendants’ Pre-Trial
Disclosure (ECF No. 64) because of failures to comply with the Local Rules and the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs argue that Defendants’ disclosure specifically fails to comply with
Local Rule 26.2(11) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(3)(A)(iii)’s requirement to list and
detail the exhibits a party anticipates using at trial. Plaintiff notes that Defendant’s disclosure
simply states that the exhibits they may offer includes “Anything produced, attached, or identified
in the disclosures, depositions, pleadings, or discovery responses of the parties.” Plaintiffs further
argue that the Defendants’ disclosure violates Local Rule 26.2(12) and Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 26(a)(3)(A)(i)’s requirement to provide the name, address, and telephone number of
each witness they expect to call at trial. Plaintiff notes that Defendants’ disclosure only lists one
witness by name, vaguely references the other witnesses they plan to call, and includes no contact
information for any witnesses. Plaintiff contends that this clear failure to adhere to the pre-trial
disclosure requirements should lead the Court to strike Defendants’ pre-trial disclosure and
preclude Defendants from using any unnamed exhibits or witnesses pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 37(c).

Upon review, the Court finds that good cause for the instant motion has been shown.
Defendants have failed to adhere to the pre-trial discloser requirements of Local Rule 26.2 and
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a) that they list with specificity the exhibits and witnesses they
plan to utilize at trial. However, the Court will permit Defendants to re-submit their pre-trial
disclosures in the time directed by the Court in this order. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike
(ECF No. 69) is hereby GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Court herby
STRIKES Defendants’ Pre-Trial Disclosure (ECF No. 64). Defendants are directed that a new
pre-trial disclosure sheet that complies with the Local Rules and the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure must be submitted within ten (10) days of the date of this order. Plaintiff shall have
seven (7) days from the date of Defendants’ new disclosure to renew any objections.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 30th day of January, 2023.
/s/ Susan O. Hickey
Susan O. Hickey
Chief United States District Judge

2