Bruner-McMahon et al v. Sedgwick, County of et al

Filing 215

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 196 Defendant Stanton County Board of Commissioners' Motion to Compel Discovery. Plaintiffs shall produce all documents responsive to Defendant Board's Third Request for Production within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order. It is further ordered that within twenty (20) days from the date of this order Plaintiffs shall show cause in writing, why the Court should not order payment of reasonable expenses incurred in making the motion, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(5)(A). Within fourteen (14) days thereafter Defendant Board may respond thereto, and Plaintiffs may then reply within fourteen (14) days of service of the response. Signed by Magistrate Judge Gerald L. Rushfelt on 6/16/2011. (byk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

TERA M. BRUNER-McMAHON,
Administrator of the Estate of TERRY
ALBERT BRUNER, Deceased, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.

Case No. 10-1064-KHV-GLR

COUNTY OF SEDGWICK,
et al.,
Defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant Stanton County Board of Commissioners (“Board”) has filed a Motion to Compel
Discovery (ECF No. 196). It requests an order to compel Plaintiffs to produce documents
responsive to its Third Request for Production of Documents, which seeks “[a]ny and all documents
designated in plaintiffs’ 26(a) Disclosures as exhibits that have not been produced.” Defendant
Board asserts that Plaintiffs’ response was insufficient as the requested documents have not been
produced. It also requests its attorneys fees incurred in making the motion.
Defendant Board served Plaintiffs with its Third Request for Production of Documents on
March 18, 2011. Plaintiffs served their response on April 18, 2011. It states that “[a]ll such
designated documents in the possession of Plaintiffs have previously been produced. Plaintiffs will
supplement this response as necessary.”
Defendant Board states in its motion and Certificate of Compliance (ECF No. 198) that its
counsel discussed the response with counsel for Plaintiffs on May 3, 2011, followed by an e-mail

on May 4, 2011, listing the documents which had not been produced. As of the date the motion to
compel was filed, it had not received the listed documents from Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs have filed no response to the motion within fourteen days, as required by D. Kan.
Rule 6.1(d)(1). Pursuant to D. Kan. Rule 7.4(b), “[i]f a responsive brief or memorandum is not filed
within the Rule 6.1(d) time requirements, the court will consider and decide the motion as an
uncontested motion. Ordinarily, the court will grant the motion without further notice.” The Court
will therefore grant the motion as uncontested under D. Kan. Rule 7.4(b).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Defendant Board’s Motion to Compel Discovery
(doc. 197) is granted. Plaintiffs shall produce all documents responsive to Defendant Board’s Third
Request for Production within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT within twenty (20) days from the date of this order
Plaintiffs shall show cause in writing, why the Court should not order payment of reasonable
expenses incurred in making the motion, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(5)(A).
Within fourteen (14) days thereafter Defendant Board may respond thereto, and Plaintiffs may then
reply within fourteen (14) days of service of the response.
Dated in Kansas City, Kansas on this 16th day of June, 2011.

S/ Gerald L. Rushfelt
Gerald L. Rushfelt
United States Magistrate Judge