Dobbs v. Morbank, Inc.

Filing 100

COURTROOM MINUTES/MINUTE ORDER for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty: Telephonic Motion Hearing held on 11/1/2011, granting in part and denying in part 77 Plaintiff's Combined Motion to Compel Supplementation of Discovery Responses, Motion for Sanctions, and Motion to Allow Supplemental Discovery and a Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition for Trial Preservation Purposes. (FTR: C. Coomes -- Courtroom A-501) (mehcd)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO MAGISTRATE JUDGE MICHAEL E. HEGARTY Civil Action No. 09-cv-01403-MSK-MEH Courtroom Deputy: Cathy Coomes Date: November 1, 2011 FTR – Courtroom A501 ALEXANDER A. DOBBS, Gerald P. McDermott William James Hansen Plaintiff, vs. MORBARK, INC., Steven M. Hamilton Kevin G. Dougherty (by phone) Defendants. COURTROOM MINUTES/MINUTE ORDER TELEPHONIC MOTION HEARING Court in session: 2:10 p.m. Court calls case. Appearances of counsel. Argument and discussion regarding Plaintiff’s Combined Motion to Compel Supplementation of Discovery Responses, Motion for Sanctions, and Motion to Allow Supplemental Discovery and a Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition for Trial Preservation Purposes (Doc. #77, filed 9/16/11). ORDERED: Plaintiff’s Combined Motion to Compel Supplementation of Discovery Responses, Motion for Sanctions, and Motion to Allow Supplemental Discovery and a Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition for Trial Preservation Purposes (Doc. #77, filed 9/16/11) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as stated on the record. Plaintiff may supplement its expert report on or before November 18, 2011. Defendant may supplement its expert report, if necessary, on or before December 9, 2011. The Court will allow a brief supplemental deposition based only on any changes to expert opinions. Court in recess: 2:46 p.m. (Hearing concluded) Total time in court: 0:36

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?