A.I. Credit Corp. v. Thomas Group Holding Co. et al

Filing 98

RULING granting 97 Motion to Compel Discovery Responses and for Sanctions. Dfts Phillip R. Thomas and Wayne L. Thomas shall produce for inspection and copying all documents responsive to the pltf's requests for production of documents, without objections, within 14 days. Pursuant to Rule 37(d)(3), the dfts are also ordered to pay to the pltf, within 14 days, reasonable expenses in the amount of $250.00.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Riedlinger on 4/30/2012. (CMM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

A.I. CREDIT CORP.
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
NUMBER 05-MC-60-JJB-SCR
THOMAS GROUP HOLDING CO., ET AL
RULING ON MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY RESPONSES
Before the court is a Motion to Compel Discovery Responses and
for Sanctions filed by plaintiff A.I. Credit Corp. Record document
number 97.

No opposition has been filed.

Plaintiff’s

motion

shows

that

it

served

a

Request

for

Production of Documents on defendants Phillip R. Thomas and Wayne
L. Thomas on October 31, 2011.1

Defendants failed to respond to

the requests and the plaintiff sent a letter advising them that if
they did not respond by the end of the year, a motion to compel
would be filed.
regular

mail.

Plaintiff sent this letter by certified and
Defendants

refused

to

claim

delivery

of

the

certified letters, but the letters sent by regular mail were not
returned as undeliverable.

Thus, it is apparent from the record

that despite the plaintiff’s efforts, the defendants continue to
ignore the discovery request and still have not provided the

1

Plaintiff is attempting to obtain information to enforce and
collect on the judgment registered in this court in October 2005.
Plaintiff’s discovery included five requests to obtain copies of
the defendants’ personal financial statements, federal and state
tax returns, bank account and safety deposit box statements.
Record document number 97-1.

documents requested.

Nor have the defendants responded to this

motion or otherwise furnished any information indicating when they
will provide the discovery.

Defendants’ failure to either respond

or object to the requests for production of documents demonstrates
that under Rule 37(d)(1)(A)(ii), Fed.R.Civ.P., the plaintiff is
entitled to an order compelling the defendants to respond and
imposing sanctions.

Defendants will be required to produce all

responsive documents for inspection and copying within 14 days. No
objections will be allowed.2

However, other than recovery of its

expenses, the plaintiff did not seek imposition of any additional
sanctions available under Rule 37(d)(3).3
Under Rule 37(d)(3), the court must require the party failing
to act or the attorney advising that party, or both, to pay to the
moving party the reasonable expenses incurred in making the motion,
including attorney’s fees.

But, the court must not order the

payment if the motion was filed without the movant first making a
good faith effort to obtain the discovery without court action, the
party’s nondisclosure, response or objection was substantially
justified, or other circumstances make an award of expenses unjust.

2

Generally, discovery objections are waived if a party fails
to timely object to interrogatories, production requests or other
discovery efforts.
See, In re U.S., 864 F.2d 1153, 1156 (5th
Cir.), reh’g denied, 869 F.2d 1487 (5th Cir. 1989); Godsey v. U.S.,
133 F.R.D. 111, 113 (S.D. Miss. 1990).
3

Rule 37(d)(3) incorporates the sanctions available under
Rule 37(b)(2)(A)(i)-(vi).
2

See Rules 37(d)(1)(B) and (d)(3).
Plaintiff’s motion shows it made a good faith attempt to
obtain the discovery responses without court action.

Defendants

failed to respond to the discovery requests and to the plaintiff’s
efforts to obtain them.

This demonstrates that the plaintiff is

entitled to reasonable expenses under Rule 37(d)(3).4

Plaintiff

did not submit anything to support a request for a specific amount
of expenses.

A review of the motion and memorandum supports the

conclusion that an award of $250.00 is reasonable.
Accordingly, the Motion to Compel Discovery Responses and for
Sanctions

filed

by

plaintiff

A.I.

Credit

Corp.

is

granted.

Defendants Phillip R. Thomas and Wayne L. Thomas shall produce for
inspection and copying all documents responsive to the plaintiff’s
requests for production of documents, without objections, within 14
days.

Pursuant to Rule 37(d)(3), the defendants are also ordered

to pay to the plaintiff, within 14 days, reasonable expenses in the
amount of $250.00.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, April 30, 2012.

STEPHEN C. RIEDLINGER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

4

There are no facts which show that the defendants’ failure
to serve discovery responses was substantially justified and there
are no circumstances which would make an award of expenses unjust.
3