Franklin v. Golden Corral Corporation

Filing 7

RULING granting 6 Motion to Compel. Plaintiff Rachel Franklin shall serve supplemental answers to the defendants Interrogatory Numbers 5, 6, 13, 14, and 15 and produce documents responsive to the defendants Request for Production of documents Numbe rs 2, 3, 4 and 8, without objections and within 14 days. Pursuant to Rule 37(d)(3), the plaintiff shall pay to the defendant, within 14 days, its reasonable expenses in the amount of $300.00. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Riedlinger on 03/20/2015.(BCL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

RACHEL FRANKLIN
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
NUMBER 14-224-JJB-SCR
GOLDEN CORRAL CORPORATION
RULING MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
Before the court is the Motion to Compel filed by defendant
Golden

Corral

Corporation.

Record

document

number

6.

No

opposition or other response has been filed.
Defendant Golden Corral Corporation filed this motion to
compel plaintiff Rachel Franklin, individually and on behalf of her
minor child, Eugenia Davis, to provide supplemental answers to
discovery requests propounded on July 7, 2014.1 Defendant asserted
that the plaintiff responded to its requests on December 18, 2014,2
but failed to provide specific information concerning medical
treatment and expenses and produce any photographs of the minor
child’s alleged injuries, as requested in Interrogatory Numbers 5,
6, 13, 14, and 15 and Request for Production of Documents Numbers
2, 3, 4, and 8.3

1

Record document number 6-3, Exhibit A.

2

In a November 19, 2014 letter, the defendant granted the
plaintiff an extension until November 28, 2014 to provide her
responses. Record document number 6-5, Exhibit C.
3

Record document number 6-4, Exhibit B. Plaintiff’s Answers
to Interrogatories were not singed by her nor were they made under
(continued...)

Defendant provided evidence of its efforts to obtain the
plaintiff’s
Defendant

discovery

asserted

responses

that

it

prior

to

contacted

filing

the

its

plaintiff’s

motion.4
counsel

numerous times and last spoke to the plaintiff’s counsel on
February 10, 2015.

After no supplemental responses were received,

the defendant filed this motion to compel on February 13, 2015.
Despite the defendant’s efforts to obtain the plaintiff’s
discovery responses, she did not serve any supplemental answers or
produce responsive documents.

Nor has the plaintiff responded to

this motion or otherwise furnished any information indicating when
her supplemental discovery responses will be provided. Plaintiff’s
December 1, 2014 responses state that the requested information
will be forwarded upon receipt by the plaintiff. However, the fact
discovery deadline ended on March 1, 2015.5

Plaintiff has had

sufficient time to provide the information and produce responsive
documents, or at least explain what efforts she has made to do so.
In these circumstances, under Rule 37(a)(3) and (d)(1)(A),
Fed.R.Civ.P., the defendant is entitled to an order requiring the
plaintiff to respond and imposing sanctions.

Plaintiff will be

required to provide supplemental responses to the Interrogatory
Numbers 5, 6, 13, 14, and 15 and produce responsive documents to

3

(...continued)
oath, as required by Rules 33(b)(3) and (5), Fed.R.Civ.P. This
ruling requires the plaintiff to correct those deficiencies.
4

Record document number 6-5, Exhibit C.

5

Record document number 5, Scheduling Order.
2

Request for Production of Documents Numbers 2, 3, 4 and 8 within 14
No objections will be allowed.6

days.

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

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 expenses unjust.
Defendant’s motion shows that a good faith attempt was made to
obtain the discovery responses without court action.

Nothing in

the record indicates that the plaintiff’s failure was substantially
justified or that there are any circumstances which would make an
award of expenses unjust.

Therefore, the defendant is entitled to

reasonable expenses under Rule 37(d)(3).

Defendant did not claim

a specific amount of expenses incurred in filing this motion.

A

review of the motion and memorandum supports the conclusion that an
award of $300.00 is reasonable.
Accordingly, the defendant’s Motion to Compel is granted.
Plaintiff Rachel Franklin shall serve supplemental answers to the
defendant’s Interrogatory Numbers 5, 6, 13, 14, and 15 and produce
documents responsive to the defendant’s Request for Production of
Documents Numbers 2, 3, 4 and 8, without objections and within 14

6

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

days.

Plaintiff’ supplemental answers must comply with Rules

33(b)(3) and (5), Fed.R.Civ.P. (answers must be under oath and
signed by the plaintiff). Plaintiff must also serve a certificate,
signed by her under oath, stating that her previous answers to
interrogatories are true and correct to best of her knowledge,
except

as

Pursuant

they
to

may

Rule

be

changed

37(d)(3),

the

by

her

supplemental

plaintiff

shall

pay

answers.
to

the

defendant, within 14 days, its reasonable expenses in the amount of
$300.00.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, March 20, 2015.

STEPHEN C. RIEDLINGER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

4