Estes v. Bolin et al
OPINION AND ORDER granting 22 Motion to Compel; Plaintiff is instructed to respond to Defendants discovery requests and provide initial disclosures without objection by 3/1/2021, or the case will be dismissed.Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes III on February 17, 2021. (lw)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FORT SMITH DIVISION
SHAUN JERMAINE ESTES
KEVIN BOLIN, SCOTT NEWTON,
and KEITH SHELBY
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Defendants’ motion (Doc. 22) to compel and brief in support (Doc.
23). Plaintiff did not file a response. Defendants assert, and the Court agrees, that Plaintiff’s
responses to Defendants’ first set of interrogatories were deficient. Plaintiff’s objections to
Defendants’ discovery requests are without merit because Defendants’ requests are relevant to
Plaintiff’s claims and Defendants’ defenses. Plaintiff has also not responded to Defendants’
requests for initial disclosures. Defendants’ exhibits demonstrate that they have attempted to
confer in good faith with Plaintiff according to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a) to obtain discovery without
the necessity of court action. Plaintiff chose to procced in this Court and is reminded that he is
bound by the same Rules and expectations as parties represented by counsel. Failure to meet
obligations under the Rules may result in sanctions, up to and including dismissal.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants’ motion (Doc. 22) to compel is
GRANTED. Plaintiff is instructed to respond to Defendants’ discovery requests and provide initial
disclosures without objection by March 1, 2021, or the case will be dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of February, 2021.
/s/P. K. Holmes, III
P.K. HOLMES, III
U.S. 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?