Thogmorton et al v. Reynolds et al

Filing 98

OPINION entered by U.S. Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins. Defendants' Motion to Compel 91 is ALLOWED and Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Documents 95 is DENIED without prejudice. The Court may allow the Plaintiffs to renew Motion 95 in the future if the documents at issue are not produced in a timely manner. Defense counsel is directed to file a status report by 10/30/2015, on the production of the documents at issue in Motion 95 . See written order. (LB, ilcd)

E-FILED

Tuesday, 29 September, 2015 11:41:46 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION
BEVERLY THROGMORTON, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
RUSSELL REYNOLDS, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 12-cv-3087

OPINION
TOM SCHANZLE-HASKINS, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE:
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Compel
(d/e 91) (Motion 91) and Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Documents (d/e 95)
(Motion 95). For the reasons set forth below, Motion 91 is ALLOWED and
Motion 95 is DENIED without prejudice.
I.

Motion 91
The Defendants filed and served Motion 91 on June 30, 2015. The

Plaintiffs were required to file a response to Motion 91 within fourteen days of
service or the Court would presume that Plaintiffs had no opposition to the
Motion. Local Rule 7.1(B)(2). The Plaintiffs have not responded to Motion 91 as
of the date of this Opinion. The Court, therefore, presumes that Plaintiffs have
no objection to Motion 91. Motion 91 is ALLOWED. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’

Page 1 of 2

objections to Defendants’ Interrogatories are overruled and Plaintiffs are directed
to answer Defendants’ Interrogatories in full by October 30, 2015.
II.

Motion 95
Motion 95 seeks to compel the production of documents. The documents

are not in the possession of the individual defendants, but are held by the Illinois
Department of Corrections and the Illinois Central Management Services. The
Assistant Illinois Attorney General representing the Defendants in this case is in
the process securing the documents from the respective agencies. Motion 95 is
therefore DENIED without prejudice. The Court may allow the Plaintiffs to renew
Motion 95 in the future if the documents at issue are not produced in a timely
manner. Defense counsel is directed to file a status report by October 30, 2015,
on the production of the documents at issue.
THEREFORE, Defendants’ Motion to Compel (d/e 91) is ALLOWED and
Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Documents (d/e 95) is DENIED without prejudice.
The Court may allow the Plaintiffs to renew Motion 95 in the future if the
documents at issue are not produced in a timely manner. Defense counsel is
directed to file a status report by October 30, 2015, on the production of the
documents at issue in Motion 95.
ENTER:

September 29, 2015.
s/ Tom Schanzle-Haskins
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 2 of 2