Rodriquez v. Calace et al

Filing 80

ORDER granting 77 defendants' Motion Motion to Enforce the Court's Rulings and Orders dated October 7 and 24, 2011 on defendants' Motion to Compel Discovery. Signed by Judge Holly B. Fitzsimmons on 11/16/11. (Esposito, A.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
:
:
:
:
v.
:
:
NICHOLAS CALACE,
:
BERNAVIN ARMSTRONG and
:
BRIDGEPORT HOUSING AUTHORITY, :
:
:
:
:
LORI RODRIGUEZ

CIV. NO. 3:07CV200 (WWE)

FOLLOW-UP RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL
Lori Rodriguez brings this employment discrimination law
suit against her employer, the Bridgeport Housing Authority
(“BHA”); its Executive Director, Nicholas Calace, and her direct
supervisor, Bernavin Armstrong. Pending is defendants’ Motion to
Enforce [Doc. #77] the Court’s Rulings and Orders dated October 7
and 24, 2011. [Doc. ##72, 75].
On October 7, 2011, the Court granted defendants’ Motion to
Compel and ordered plaintiff to provide supplemental documents in
response to defendants’ First Set of Interrogatories and Requests
for Production dated May 20, 2009. [Doc. #72].

Specifically,

plaintiff was ordered to provide defendants with supplemental
production in response to Interrogatory No. 39 and Request for
Production No. 2, which state:
1

Interrogatory No. 39: Identify each and every
doctor, hospital, psychologist, and/or
psychiatrist from whom you sought or received
treatment for emotional distress, physical
upset, mental anguish, humiliation,
embarrassment and/or loss of enjoyment of
life, from 1998 through the present. For each
provider, please include whether a report was
prepared and the date(s) treatment was sought
or received.
Request for Production No.2: Produce complete
copies of any reports, notes, bills,
communications, labs or other tangible
material concerning any consultation or
treatment with any health care provider for
injuries identified in response to any
interrogatory.
On October 24, 2011, a telephone status conference was held.
Defendants reported that plaintiff’s production was incomplete.
The Court issued a Follow-Up Ruling and Order on October 24,
2011. [Doc. #75].
On November 16, 2011, a telephone status conference was
held. Defendants reported that plaintiff did not comply with the
Court’s October 7 and 24, 2011 Rulings and Orders.

Defendants

made an oral motion to enforce the Court’s prior rulings and
orders. [Doc. #77].

Defendant’s Motion to Enforce [Doc. #77] is

GRANTED. It is hereby ordered that plaintiff will,
1.

Provide all the medical records to defendants,
including medical records from the 2007 workers comp
proceedings. All the documents will be Bates Stamped
using consecutive numbering.

2

Plaintiff will provide

defendants with these medical records no later than
Monday, November 21, 2011 or plaintiff may be precluded
from relying on these records at trial without showing
good cause for the delay.
2.

Specifically, plaintiff will provide medical records
from Dr. Kahalid, Dr. Mahajan, Dr. Graham, Bridgeport
Hospital, Astoria Park VNA of Stratford,

VNA of

Bridgeport and the 2007 workers comp proceedings.

If

the documents have already been provided, plaintiff
will list them by Bates numbers. If there are no
responsive documents, after a good faith effort to
locate them, plaintiff will so state under oath.
Plaintiff will provide such an affidavit no later than
Monday, November 21, 2011.
3.

The Court denied defendants’ earlier request for Rule
37 sanctions without prejudice. Plaintiff is on notice
that defendants may move to preclude any testimony
about treating records that were not produced during
discovery and may seek further sanctions, including
dismissal of this case. Plaintiff’s counsel will
provide his client with a copy of this ruling and
advise her of the sanctions that may be entered if this
order is not complied with. Plaintiff is further
advised that this case cannot go to trial until fact
3

depositions are completed and discovery is closed.
Defendants are unable to schedule depositions until
they have copies of all of plaintiff’s medical records.
Plaintiff’s counsel may contact the Court to schedule a
hearing with their client to advise her of the
ramifications of failing to comply with the Court’s
rulings and orders, or cooperate to conclude discovery.
4.

The parties are reminded of their on-going duty to
supplement or correct disclosures or responses under
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e). Medical records already
disclosed must be supplemented or updated by December
5, 2011.

5.

Plaintiff will provide these documents no later than
Monday, November 21, 2011.

The parties are directed to

contact the Court if there is ANY delay in complying
with these deadlines.

An extension will only be

granted on a showing of good cause.
6.

A telephone status conference will be held on November
30, 2011 at 11:00AM.

This is not a recommended ruling.

This is a discovery

ruling and order which is reviewable pursuant to the "clearly
erroneous" statutory standard of review.

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(A); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a), 6(e) and 72(a); and Rule 2 of
the Local Rules for United States Magistrate Judges.
4

As such, it

is an order of the Court unless reversed or modified by the
district judge upon motion timely made.
SO ORDERED at Bridgeport this 16th day of November 2011.

______/s/_____________________
HOLLY B. FITZSIMMONS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

5