Glasper v. Amsted Rail Company, Inc.

Filing 28

ORDER regarding discovery dispute. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Williams on 8/16/12. (amv)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
HARLAN L. GLASPER,
Plaintiff,
vs.
AMSTED RAIL COMPANY, INC.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 12–cv–0125–MJR–SCW

ORDER
WILLIAMS, Magistrate Judge:
On August 16, 2012, this case came before the Court on a discovery dispute. Present via
telephone for the dispute conference were, for Plaintiff, Rhonda Fiss, and for Defendant, Sarah
Swatosh and R. Lance Witcher. This motion summarizes the Court’s rulings during the discovery
dispute conference. The detailed reasoning for the Court’s rulings is available on the transcript of
the hearing.
Defendant’s objection to Interrogatory No. 2 was overruled in part.

Defendants will

produce summary job descriptions, as well as the pertinent residence addresses, in response to the
interrogatory..
Defendant’s objection to Interrogatory No. 9 was sustained.
Defendant’s objection to Interrogatory No. 10 was sustained.
Defendant’s objection to Interrogatory No. 11 was sustained in part and overruled in
part. Insofar as the iPhone in question is a work phone, it is the proper subject of Interrogatory
No. 11.

Defendant’s objection to Interrogatory No. 12 was sustained in part and overruled in
part. The objection was overruled only as to the person of Chris Dockery.
Defendant’s objection to Interrogatory No. 15 was sustained in part and overruled in
part. Regarding Interrogatory 15(A), the Court DIRECTS that addresses and phone numbers are
provided by Defendant. Regarding Interrogatory 15(B), Defendants shall summarize the subjects of
the facts and opinions held/known by the witnesses. Interrogatory 15(C) is overruled except to the
extent there are claims of privilege.
The parties are DIRECTED to meet and confer re: Interrogatories No. 3 and No. 4, as well
as the requests for production.
As to issues of privilege and Defendant’s privilege log, the following briefing schedule was
set: Plaintiff’s motion to compel (not to exceed 10 pages) is due on or before 8/30/2012;
Defendant’s response due (also not to exceed 10 pages) due on or before 9/13/2012.
The case is reset for two followup telephonic discovery conferences: (1) on 8/29/2012 at
10:20 a.m. to deal with remaining, non-privilege-related discovery disputes (pertinent documents
should be submitted on or before 8/27/2012); (2) on 9/17/2012 at 3:30 p.m. to deal with issues
remaining to Defendant’s assertions of privilege.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: August 16, 2012

/s/ Stephen C. Williams
STEPHEN C. WILLIAMS
United States Magistrate Judge