Brian Harris Auto Group v. Automatic Data Processing, Inc.

Filing 50

RULING granting 46 Motion to Compel Discovery. Plaintiffs shall serve their answers to the interrogatories and produce for inspection and copying all documents responsive to the defendants requests for production of documents, without objections, w ithin 14 days. Pursuant to Rule 37(d)(3), the plaintiffs are also ordered to pay to the defendant, within 14 days, reasonable expenses in the amount of $250.00. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Riedlinger on 11/2/2011. (LSM) Modified on 11/2/2011 to edit text (LSM).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

BRIAN HARRIS AUTO GROUP
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
NUMBER 10-290-BAJ-SCR
AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING, INC.
RULING ON MOTION TO COMPEL
Before the court is a Motion to Compel Discovery Responses
filed by defendant ADP Dealer Services, Inc., formerly known as
ADP, Inc.

Record document number 46.

No opposition has been

filed.
Defendant served the plaintiffs Harris Chevrolet, Inc. and
Harris Chevrolet II, LLC with its first set of interrogatories and
requests for production of documents on July 12, 2011.1

According

to the defendant, as of the date the defendant filed this motion
the

plaintiffs

had

not

responded

to

the

discovery

requests.

Defendant’s motion showed that despite communications with counsel
for the plaintiff at the end of August and beginning of September,
the plaintiffs have still not provided their answers and produced
responsive documents.2

Nor have the plaintiffs responded to this

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

1

Record document number 46-2.

2

Record document numbers 46-3 and 46-4.

Plaintiffs’

failure

to

either

answer

or

object

to

the

interrogatories and produce responsive documents demonstrates that
under Rule 37(d)(1)(A)(ii), Fed.R.Civ.P., the defendant is entitled
to an order imposing sanctions and compelling the plaintiffs to
respond to the discovery requests.3

Plaintiffs must answer the

interrogatories and produce all responsive documents for inspection
and copying within 14 days.

No objections will be allowed.4

However, other than recovery of its expenses, the defendant did not
seek imposition of any of the additional sanctions available under
Rule 37(d)(3).5
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.

3

Defendant cited Rule 37(a), but when a party totally fails
to serve any response to a discovery request Rule 37(d) applies.
4

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.)
5

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).
Defendant’s motion shows it made a good faith attempt to
obtain the plaintiffs’ discovery responses without court action.
Plaintiffs failed to respond to the discovery requests and to the
defendant’s efforts to obtain their discovery responses.

This

demonstrates that the defendant is entitled to reasonable expenses
under Rule 37(d)(3).6

Defendant 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 filed by
defendant ADP Dealer Services, Inc. is granted.
serve

their

answers

to

the

interrogatories

Plaintiffs shall
and

produce

for

inspection and copying all documents responsive to the defendants’
requests for production of documents, without objections, within 14
days.

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

to pay to the defendant, within 14 days, reasonable expenses in the
amount of $250.00.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, November 2, 2011.

STEPHEN C. RIEDLINGER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6

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