Brown v. Louisiana State Senate et al
ORDER granting 15 Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents and Initial Disclosures. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Riedlinger on 11/20/2012. (CGP)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ANN S. BROWN
LOUISIANA STATE SENATE, ET AL
RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
Before the court is the Defendants’ Motion to Compel Answers
to Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents and
Initial Disclosures filed by defendants Joel T. Chaisson, II and
the State of Louisiana through the Louisiana State Senate.
document number 15.
No opposition has been filed.
Defendants’ motion shows that despite a deadline of March 28,
Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents on March
As of the time of filing this motion the plaintiff had
also failed to provide any answers or documents in response to
these discovery requests. Despite the defendants’ repeated efforts
to obtain the disclosures and discovery responses,3 the plaintiff
still has not fulfilled any of her discovery obligations.
Record document number 13, item B.
Record document number 15-2, exhibit A.
Record document number 15-3, exhibit B, and record document
number 15-4, exhibit C.
the plaintiff responded to this motion or otherwise furnished any
information indicating when the disclosures/discovery responses
will be provided.
In these circumstances, under Rule 37(b) and
(d)(1)(A), Fed.R.Civ.P., the defendants are entitled to an order
Plaintiff will be required to provide the initial disclosures,
answer the interrogatories, and produce responsive documents for
inspection and copying within 14 days.
No objections will be
allowed.4 Rule 37(d)(3) incorporates the sanctions available under
However, other than recovery of the
expenses incurred in filing the motion the defendants did not seek
With regard to the recovery of expenses, under Rule 37(d)(3)
the court must require the party failing to act, or the attorney
advising that party, or both, to pay the reasonable expenses,
including attorney’s fees caused by the failure unless the failure
was substantially justified or other circumstances make an award of
Defendants’ motion shows that a good faith
attempt was made to obtain the disclosures and discovery responses
without court action.
Plaintiff never responded to this motion or
otherwise offer any explanation for the failure to cooperate and
Generally, discovery objections are waived if a party fails
to timely object to interrogatories, production requests or other
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.)
provide her discovery.
Nothing in the record indicates that the
Therefore, the defendants are entitled to reasonable expenses under
Defendants did not claim a specific amount for the
time expended in filing this motion.
motion and memorandum supports
However, a review of the
the conclusion that an award of
$250.00 is reasonable.
Accordingly, the Defendants’ Motion to Compel Answers to
Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents and Initial
Disclosures is granted.
Plaintiff shall serve the initial disclosures, answers to
documents responsive to the defendants’ requests for production,
without objections, within 14 days. Pursuant to Rule 37(d)(3), the
plaintiff is also ordered to pay to the defendants, within 14 days,
reasonable expenses in the amount of $250.00.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, November 20, 2012.
STEPHEN C. RIEDLINGER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?