Cooper et al v. Pierce Plaza, LLC et al
Filing
25
ORDER directing Plaintiff to file, within 14 days of service of this Order, a written response including the case caption and titled "Response to Order" stating whether she intends to further prosecute this case. (Compliance due by 4/16/2019). Signed by Magistrate Judge Christopher L. Ray on 4/2/19. (wwp)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
VANESSA COOPER
Plaintiff,
v.
)
)
)
)
)
CV418-131
)
PIERCE PLAZA, LLC, d/b/a
Hampstead Oaks Apts. and
MARTIN H. BAILEY,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER
Defendants seek to compel discovery responses and mandatory fees
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 & 37. Doc. 23. Plaintiff Vanessa Cooper1
having failed to respond, that motion is unopposed by operation of the
Local Rules. S.D. Ga. L. R. 7.5 (“Failure to respond within the applicable
time period shall indicate that there is no opposition to a motion.”).
Normally, that would oblige the Court to grant the motion to compel as
unopposed and move immediately to the request for an award of fees and
1
Plaintiff Savannah Chatham County Fair Housing Council was dismissed with
prejudice from the case. Doc. 22.
costs. Here, however, the situation has a few wrinkles that require
resolution prior to entry of any order.
Plaintiffs initial (allegedly) deficient responses to discovery were
submitted last year, in the months before counsel withdrew. See doc. 23
(representing that plaintiff’s deficient responses were submitted between
October and December 2018); doc. 20 (February 20, 2019 order granting
motion for withdrawal of counsel and imposing 90-day extension of all
deadlines to permit plaintiff to find replacement counsel).
She has
neither supplemented her deficient responses nor contacted defendant to
indicate her intention to comply with her discovery obligations or request
an extension of time to do so. Perhaps plaintiff believes that she does not
need to respond, given that deadlines were stayed so she could locate
counsel. Even though she is currently unrepresented, however, plaintiff
must abide the same discovery obligations as a represented party. Her
silence indicates an unwillingness or lack of desire to do so.
Because plaintiff is entitled to an opportunity to be heard before the
imposition of fees and costs under Rule 37, the Court will give her an
opportunity to clarify both whether she intends to proceed with this case
and a response, if any, to defendants’ sanctions demand. Plaintiff is
2
therefore DIRECTED to file, within 14 days of service of this Order, a
written response, including the case caption and titled “Response to
Order,” stating whether she intends to further prosecute this case and
her opposition (if any) to an award of fees to defendants for their time
expended in preparing the motion to compel. If she does not oppose,
plaintiff is ORDERED to confer with defendants to reach an agreement
on fees and costs and the parties should file a joint notice of their
stipulation to fees and costs with the Court within that same 14 day
period. If plaintiff disputes the amount of fees and costs claimed, she
must file her opposition to that claim within the same time period.
Further, if plaintiff declines to respond in any way to this Court’s
Order within 14 days, the Court will recommend her case be dismissed
for failure to both prosecute the case and comply with a court order. This
Court, after all, has the inherent authority to prune cases from its dockets
where parties have failed to comply with its Orders. See L.R. 41(b); see
Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (courts have the
inherent authority to dismiss claims for lack of prosecution); Mingo v.
Sugar Cane Growers Co-op, 864 F.2d 101, 102 (11th Cir. 1989); Jones v.
Graham, 709 F.2d 1457, 1458 (11th Cir. 1983); Floyd v. United States,
3
CV491-277 (S.D. Ga. June 10, 1992).
SO ORDERED, this 2nd day of April, 2019.
________________________
______________________________
_
_
CHRISTOPHER L. RAY
HRIST PHER
ISTOP
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
4
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?