Fiddler's Creek, LLC v. Naples Lending Group LC

Filing 251

ORDER denying 237 Plaintiff's Motion to Quash a Limited Portion of Third Party Subpoenas Issued by Defendants, or, in the Alternative, Motion for Protective Order Regarding Such Limited Portion of Third Party Subpoenas; denying 244 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Reply to Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Quash Portions of Non-Party Subpoenas. See Order for details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carol Mirando on 4/28/2016. (ANW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
IN RE: FIDDLER’S CREEK, LLC
FIDDLER’S CREEK, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 2:14-cv-379-FtM-29CM

NAPLES LENDING GROUP LC
and DANIEL CARTER,
Defendants/Third
Party Plaintiff
AUBREY FERRAO, ANTHONY
DINARDO and WILLIAM
REAGAN,
Third Party Defendants.
______________________________________/
ORDER
Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash a Limited Portion of Third
Party Subpoenas Issued by Defendants, or, in the Alternative, Motion for Protective
Order Regarding Such Limited Portion of Third Party Subpoenas (“Motion to Quash”)
(Doc. 237) and Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Reply to Defendants’ Opposition to
Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash Portions of Non-Party Subpoenas (“Motion for Reply”)
(Doc. 244). Defendants filed responses in opposition to the Motion to Quash and
Motion for Reply. Docs. 241, 247.
The Court held a discovery hearing on April 27, 2016 and heard extensive
argument on the motions and other discovery issues. For the reasons stated on the

record, Plaintiff’s motions are denied. The parties also discussed pending issues
with financial worth discovery issued to Defendant Daniel Carter related to Plaintiff’s
punitive damages claim and Defendants Naples Lending Group, LC’s and Daniel
Carter’s subpoena to Tobin & Reyes, PA. The Court declines to address these issues
at this time, as the Court does not have sufficient briefing to make a ruling. The
parties may address these issues by further motions if not otherwise resolved (which
the Court encourages the parties to continue to attempt to do), bearing in mind the
upcoming discovery deadline of May 31, 2016.
ACCORDINGLY, it is hereby
ORDERED:
1.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash a Limited Portion of Third Party Subpoenas

Issued by Defendants, or, in the Alternative, Motion for Protective Order Regarding
Such Limited Portion of Third Party Subpoenas (Doc. 237) is DENIED.
Furthermore, Plaintiff is directed to produce the documents it received in response to
the subpoena issued to Cohen Financial.
2.

Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Reply to Defendants’ Opposition to

Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash Portions of Non-Party Subpoenas (Doc. 244) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on this 28th day of April, 2016.

Copies:
Counsel of record

-2-