Fiore v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
Filing
203
ORDER denying as moot 192 Defendant's Motion to Compel Plaintiffs' Production of Documents Responsive to Request No. 1 of Defendant's Request for Production ; denying as moot 193 Defendant's Motion to Compel the Deposition of Plaintiff Erik Sherman. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 3/26/2012. (LMH)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
WAYNE FIORE, on his own behalf and others
similarly situated, and WARNER N. ELKINS,
CHARLES BOGGS, ERIC CRONCE, BRENDA
D. SMITH, CASEY HAMLIN, CHRISTOPHER
TIEDEMANN, SCOTT WANDELL, JAMES
BETTS, JUSTIN SPURLOCK, MICHAEL
HOFFMAN, RICHARD ANDERSON, MICHAEL
HONDLIK, SCOTT DUNN, BELA HALMI,
MISTY SANCHEZ, ERIK SHERMAN, APOLO
PLATON, as opt-in plaintiffs,
Plaintiffs,
-vs-
Case No. 2:09-cv-843-FtM-29SPC
GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, an
Ohio Corporation,
Defendant.
______________________________________
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Compel Plaintiffs’ Production
of Documents Responsive to Request No. 1 of Defendant’s Request for Production (Doc. #192) filed
on February 24, 2012, and the Defendant’s Motion to Compel Deposition of Plaintiff Erik Sherman
(Doc. # 193) filed March 7, 2012. However, since filing these motions, the parties reached an
agreement which fully resolves Plaintiffs’ Fair Labor Standards Act and state law claims. Therefore,
the matters are now moot and due to be denied.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1. Defendant’s Motion to Compel Plaintiffs’ Production of Documents Responsive to
Request No. 1 of Defendant’s Request for Production (Doc. #192) is DENIED as moot.
2. Defendant’s Motion to Compel the Deposition of Plaintiff Erik Sherman(Doc. # 193) is
DENIED as moot.
DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this 26th
Copies: All Parties of Record
-2-
day of March, 2012.
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?