Oliveras et al v. Castildi et al

Filing 42

RULING ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR COSTS (see attached). Defendants' Motion for Costs 39 is granted in the amount of $1,190.00. Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 09/22/2014. (Malone, A.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
-------------------------------------------------------X
:
JOSE OLIVERAS ET AL.
:
:
V.
:
:
JASON CASTILDI ET AL.
:
-------------------------------------------------------X

3:12 CV 858 (JGM)

DATE: SEPTEMBER 22, 2014

RULING ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR COSTS
On June 11, 2012, plaintiffs commenced this diversity action against defendants,
arising from a multi-vehicle collision on I-95 North in Darien, Connecticut, on June 19, 2010
(Dkt. #1); an Amended Complaint was filed on February 28, 2013. (Dkt. #19). On January
28, 2014, the parties consented to trial before this Magistrate Judge. (Dkt. #25). Under the
present scheduling order established in this Magistrate Judge's Ruling on Defendants' Motion
to Compel, filed July 1, 2014 (Dkt. #34)["July 2014 Ruling"], all fact discovery is to be
completed by September 30, 2014, all expert discovery is to be completed by November 14,
2014, and all dispositive motions are to be filed by December 12, 2014. (At 4).
The July 2014 Ruling concerned inadequate discovery responses by plaintiffs, and in
particular with respect to a serious accident by plaintiff José Oliveras at his employment on
December 13, 2011, resulting in neck and back injuries (at issue in this lawsuit), for which
he has been found to be temporarily totally disabled. (At 1-2). The July 2014 Ruling held
that "[u]nder these circumstances, defendants [were] more than entitled to the remedies
that they [sought]," namely that (1) on or before July 18, 2014, plaintiffs were to produce
updated and accurate written responses to the interrogatories, and plaintiffs' counsel would
certify that he had met with his clients, reviewed their answers and ensured that his clients
understood the requests, and had his clients notarize that the responses were complete and

true; (2) on or before July 31, 2014, plaintiffs were to provide all medical records not yet
received concerning the subject accident, and such compliance to be made by providing the
records, not through the provision of releases; and (3) on or before August 29, 2014, plaintiff
José Oliveras was to provide all medical records from his slip and fall injury sustained
subsequent to the subject accident, again with such compliance to be made by providing the
records, not through the provision of releases. (At 3-4). The July 2014 Ruling continued that
"[i]f plaintiffs fail to comply with these deadlines, defendants are, of course, free to file a
motion for appropriate sanctions." (At 4)(footnote omitted).
On July 25, 2014, defendants filed their Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #35), on the grounds
that plaintiffs failed to produce the updated and accurate written responses to the
interrogatories, and plaintiffs' counsel failed to provide the certification by July 18, 2014, as
required by the July 2014 Ruling. On August 22, 2014, this Magistrate Judge filed her Ruling
on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #38)["August 2014 Ruling"], in which she denied
defendants' request for "the harsh remedy of dismissal," but instead imposed the following
orders: (1) plaintiffs Myrna Oliveras and Jelisa Oliveras were to file updated interrogatory
responses on or before September 15, 2014; (2) defense counsel was to notify plaintiffs'
counsel as to any additional deficiencies he notices in plaintiff José Oliveras' compliance to
date, and plaintiff José Oliveras was to provide corrected, complete and accurate responses
on or before September 19, 2014; (3) if plaintiffs failed to comply with these deadlines,
defendants were free to file a motion for appropriate sanctions; and (4) defendants were
permitted to file a Motion for Attorney's Fees with respect to filing their Motion to Compel
and briefs, and their Motion to Dismiss and briefs. (At 4).

2

Five days later, defendants filed the pending Motion for Costs (Dkt. #39),1 in which
defendants seek 7.0 hours for the two prior motions and 1.5 hours for the pending motion,
at $140/hour, for a total of $1,190. (At 2; see Affidavit). In their brief in opposition, filed
September 17, 2014 (Dkt. #40), plaintiffs represent that consistent with the August 2014
Ruling, (1) plaintiffs Myrna Oliveras and Jelisa Oliveras served updated interrogatory
responses on September 12, 2014; (2) plaintiff José Oliveras served corrected, complete and
accurate responses on September 12, 2014; (3) defense counsel has not notified plaintiffs'
counsel as to any additional deficiencies he notices in plaintiff José Oliveras' compliance to
date, and (4) plaintiffs have served more than one hundred pages of updated medical
records. (At 2-3). Plaintiffs therefore argue that no costs should be awarded and that 8.5
hours is excessive. (At 3). In their reply brief, filed the next day (Dkt. #41), defendants
argue that the updated responses for plaintiffs Jesila Oliveras and Myrna Oliveras are still
deficient, in that no medical records were provided with the updated responses, that
defendants intend to file a Renewed Motion to Dismiss, and that defendants now seek an
additional two hours in attorney's fees, raising the hours sought to 10.5 hours, totaling
$1,470. (At 2-3).
It goes without saying that defendants are entitled to their costs, as the August 2014
Ruling already has held. The hours in defense counsel's time sheets for the period May 21,
2014 through August 25, 2014 are more than reasonable, unrelated items already were
omitted, and the hourly fee sought is extremely reasonable as well. However, the two extra
hours sought since plaintiffs' brief in opposition was filed on September 17, 2014 appear
excessive, and no reimbursement will be ordered. Therefore, defendants' Motion for Costs
1

Attached is an affidavit from defense counsel, sworn to that day and a copy of his
time sheets from May 21, 2014 through August 25, 2014.
3

(Dkt. #39) is granted in the amount of $1,190. In addition, plaintiffs Jesila Oliveras and
Myrna Oliveras shall provide copies of all updated medical records on or before October
6, 2014. Again, defendants are free to file a Renewed Motion to Dismiss if such records are
not forthcoming by October 6, 2014 and may file a supplemental Motion for Costs.
Dated at New Haven, Connecticut, this 22nd day of September, 2014.

/s/ Joan G. Margolis, USMJ
Joan Glazer Margolis
United States Magistrate Judge

4