LISCAR et al v. PEDIATRIC ACUTE CARE OF COLUMBUS PC et al
ORDER denying 21 Motion for Attorney Fees. Ordered by Judge Clay D. Land on 10/12/2012.(aaf)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
DIANE LISCAR and ERIC LISCAR,
CASE NO. 4:12-CV-8 (CDL)
COLUMBUS, P.C., BEN OVERBY, and
O R D E R
On July 25, 2012, the Court granted Defendant Pediatric
Acute Care of Columbus, P.C.’s (“Defendant”) motion to compel
Order, ECF No. 20.
Defendant then filed a motion for attorney’s
fees against the Hospital (ECF No. 21), requesting its fees and
costs in the amount of $316.00 incurred in conjunction with its
request is denied.
duces tecum pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45,
Defs.’ Mot. to Compel Docs. Against Non-Party
Martin Army Community Hospital [hereinafter Mot. to Compel] Ex.
A, Subpoena, ECF No. 16-1 (seeking D. Liscar’s medical records);
Mot. to Compel Ex. B, Subpoena, ECF No. 16-2 at 2 (seeking E.
with the subpoenas duces tecum.
Mot. to Compel 1, ECF No. 16.
records requested by the subpoenas.
Order 2, ECF No. 20.
Defendant moves the Court for an award of fees and costs
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37.
Rule 37 permits an
award of attorney’s fees and costs to the moving party if the
Court grants a motion to compel pursuant to that rule.
motions to compel compliance with a subpoena duces tecum issued
pursuant to Rule 45.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(3) (enumerating
motions to which Rule 37 applies).
failure to obey a subpoena without excuse can subject that nonparty to contempt.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(e).
Court found the proper remedy for
In this case, the
the Hospital’s failure to
comply initially with the subpoenas to be an order from the
Court directing the Hospital to comply.
with that order of the Court.
The Hospital did comply
Under these circumstances, the
Court finds that any additional remedy is not warranted, and
(ECF No. 21) is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 12th day of October, 2012.
S/Clay D. Land
CLAY D. LAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?