Hunter v. Corrections Corporation of America et al

Filing 69

ORDER denying 64 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 10/9/15. (cmr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
DUBLIN DIVISION
CURTIS HUNTER,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF
)
AMERICA, et al.,
)
)
Defendant.
)
___________

CV 314-035

ORDER
___________
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for partial reconsideration as to the Court’s
Order on Plaintiff’s motion to compel. (Doc. no. 64.) Plaintiff wishes to litigate the
timeliness of Defendants’ responses to his requests for production, despite those responses
containing certificates of service showing that the responses were sent within the requisite
thirty days. (Doc. no. 44, pp. 1, 6-34.) There is no basis for calling into question the veracity of
defense counsel's certification that he mailed the discovery responses to Plaintiff on April 23,
2015. Why Plaintiff allegedly did not receive them is a question left unanswered and subject
only to speculation, at best. Just as importantly, the objections raised in Defendants' discovery
responses had merit, and consideration of them allowed the Court to fashion a reasonable and

fair scope of discovery. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration.
(Doc. no. 64.)
SO ORDERED this 9th day of October, 2015, at Augusta, Georgia.

2