MILLS v. COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM OF EVANSVILLE et al
Filing
118
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 72 Motion to Compel. Defendants shall produce the items required herein by not later than 30 days for the date of this order. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Hussmann, Jr., on 4/19/2013. (NRN)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
EVANSVILLE DIVISION
ROBERT C. MILLS,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM OF
)
EVANSVILLE AND VANDERBURGH
)
COUNTY,
)
ALICE WEATHERS, individually and in )
her representative capacity,
)
DONNA NEWMAN, individually and in )
her representative capacity,
)
JANET JOHNSON, individually and in )
her representative capacity,
)
)
Defendants.
)
3:12-cv-64-RLY-WGH
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL
RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY
This matter came before the Honorable William G. Hussmann, Jr., United
States Magistrate Judge, on the Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery filed
by the Plaintiff, Robert C. Mills, on January 22, 2013. (Docket No. 72).
Defendants filed their responsive brief on February 22, 2013 (Docket No. 95).
Plaintiff filed a reply brief on March 11, 2013 (Docket No. 102), and Defendants
filed a surreply on March 25, 2013 (Docket No. 110).
The Magistrate Judge, being duly advised, now GRANTS, in part, and
DENIES, in part, the Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Responses to Recovery, as
follows:
Interrogatories Directed to Ms. Weathers:
1. The motion is granted, in part, as to Interrogatory No.1, as modified, in
that Ms. Weathers shall describe any instances in which she filed a report,
EEOC charge, or other formal request for assistance because she was herself a
victim of gender discrimination. In all other respects the motion to compel an
answer to Interrogatory No. 1 is denied.
2. The motion is granted, in part, as to Interrogatory No. 6 in that Ms.
Weathers should identify any charges, investigations, complaints, outcomes, and
settlements of instances alleging discrimination due to gender during the time
period of three years prior to the Plaintiff’s hire date. In all other respects the
motion to compel an answer to Interrogatory No. 6 is denied.
3. The motion is granted, in part, as to Interrogatory No. 7 with respect to
Ms. Weathers’s recollection of all communications with Donna Newman or other
CAPE board members regarding the possibility of dismissing the Plaintiff for a
period of two years prior to his termination.
4. The motion is denied as to all other interrogatories. Interrogatory No. 2
is denied as not relevant. Interrogatory No. 8 is denied at this time but may be
resubmitted if a determination is made that Ms. Weathers remains a defendant
in her individual capacity. Interrogatory Nos. 5, 10, and 11 are adequately
answered. In the event Ms. Weathers remains a defendant in this case, she will
be directed to supplement these answers at the completion of discovery.
2
Interrogatories Directed to Janet Johnson:
5. The motion is granted, in part, as to Interrogatory No.1, as modified, in
that Ms. Johnson shall describe any instances in which she filed a report, EEOC
charge, or other formal request for assistance because she was herself a victim of
gender discrimination. In all other respects the motion to compel an answer to
Interrogatory No. 1 is denied.
6. The motion is granted, in part, as to Interrogatory No. 6 in that Ms.
Johnson should identify, to the best of her knowledge, any charges,
investigations, complaints, outcomes, and settlements of instances alleging
discrimination due to gender during the time period of three years prior to
Plaintiff’s hire date. In all other respects the motion to compel an answer to
Interrogatory No. 6 is denied.
7. The motion is granted as to Interrogatory No. 7 with respect to Ms.
Johnson’s recollection of all communications with Donna Newman or other
CAPE board members regarding the possibility of dismissing the Plaintiff for a
period of two years prior to his termination.
8. The motion is denied as to all other interrogatories. Interrogatory No. 2
is denied as not relevant. Interrogatory No. 8 is denied at this time but may be
resubmitted if a determination is made that Ms. Johnson remains a defendant in
her individual capacity. Interrogatory Nos. 5, 10, and 11 are adequately
answered. In the event Ms. Johnson remains a defendant in this case, she will
be directed to supplement these answers at the completion of discovery.
3
Second Amended Discovery Demand:
9. As to Request No. 2, the motion is denied at this time. However,
Defendants shall provide those items to Plaintiff for inspection at the time of
filing the final witness and exhibit lists required by the Case Management Plan.
10. As to Request No. 3, the motion is denied. (See court’s prior order with
respect to the Motion to Compel Release of All Emails Identified in Defendant’s
Privilege Log to Plaintiff entered this date. (Docket No. 117)).
11. As to Request Nos. 4 and 6, the objections are sustained, and the
motion is denied.
12. As to Requests Nos. 5 and 7 through 37 (omitting certain deleted
requests), the motion is granted in that, to the extent the items are maintained
in a searchable format, Defendants shall produce to Plaintiff all documents for
the period of time of August 2008 through the date of the filing of this lawsuit in
a searchable format and not merely through paper copies. To the extent that
costs of providing a copy of this data exceeds $500, Plaintiff shall be responsible
for the excess costs of production.
13. As to Request No. 44, the motion is denied for any period beyond that
which Defendants have agreed to produce.
14. As to Request No. 45, the motion is granted, in part, to the extent that
Defendants shall produce to Plaintiff a report of Head Start personnel who were
similarly situated to the Plaintiff by way of approximate job title, and who were
supervised by Ms. Newman and/or Ms. Weathers for the time period of
4
September 1, 2007, to December 31, 2011. The report should provide for the
gender and reason for departure, date of departure, and date of rehire, if any. In
all other respects the motion is denied with respect to Request No. 45.
15. As to Request No. 46, the motion is granted. This information shall be
kept subject to a protective order that Plaintiff not disclose this information to
any other person and return all documents to the Defendants at the conclusion
of the litigation.
16. As to Request Nos. 47, 48, and 49, the objections are sustained, and
the motion is denied.
17. As to Request No. 50, the motion is granted, in part. Minutes of all
Personnel Committee meetings for the period of September 1, 2007, to the date
of the Plaintiff’s termination shall be produced. These may be provided in an
electronic version or by paper copies.
18. As to Request Nos. 51, 52, 54, 55, 56, 57, 59, 62, 65, 66, 67, 68, 71,
and 80, the motion is denied, except as Defendants have agreed to provide that
information.
19. As to Request No. 53, the motion is granted only to the extent that
Defendants shall provide any documents which exist establishing the dates,
times, and topics covered for training provided regarding sex discrimination laws
for the period from September 1, 2007, to the date of the Plaintiff’s termination.
20. As to Request Nos. 60, 61, and 63, the motion is denied, as the
requests are irrelevant.
5
21. As to Request Nos. 64, 69, 70, 79, and 82, the motion is denied as the
requests are over broad, vague, and not relevant.
22. As to Request No. 75, the motion is denied, as the answer is adequate.
23. As to Request No. 81, the motion is granted, in part. Defendants shall
provide copies of any claims submitted to any insurance companies regarding
accusations of gender discrimination for the period of 2007 through the date of
the Plaintiff’s termination.
Defendants shall produce the items required herein by not later than
thirty (30) days from the date of this order.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 19, 2013
__________________________
William G. Hussmann, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge
Southern District of Indiana
Served electronically on all ECF-registered counsel of record.
Served via first-class U.S. Mail:
ROBERT C. MILLS
2934 Cottage Drive
Evansville, IN 47711
6
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?