Miller v. Summit Health and Rehab Services Inc

Filing 18

MEMORANDUM ORDER granting 14 Motion to Compel. WITHIN the next fourteen days, plaintiff shall provide defendants with her Rule 26(a) initial disclosures and respond fully and completely to Summit's interrogatories and requests for production . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Summit shall have the right to reopen plaintiff's deposition, if necessary, following receipt of her initial disclosures and discovery responses. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L Hayes on 12/12/16. (crt,Crawford, A)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
MONROE DIVISION
EVA MILLER

*

CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-1066

VERSUS

*

JUDGE ROBERT G. JAMES

THE SUMMIT HEALTH AND REHAB
*
MAG. JUDGE KAREN L. HAYES
SERVICES, INC. AND WEST
MONROE GUEST HOUSE, INC.
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the undersigned Magistrate Judge, on reference from the District Court, is a
motion to compel Rule 26 initial disclosures and discovery responses [doc. # 14] filed by
defendant, The Summit Health and Rehab. Services, Inc. (“Summit”). The motion is unopposed.
For reasons assigned below, the motion is GRANTED.1
Background
In compliance with the court’s Civil Case Management Order (“CCMO”), the parties
herein held their Rule 26(f) conference on September 22, 2016. See CCMO [doc. # 5] and Rule
26(f) Case Mgmt. Report [doc. # 12]. Thus, they were required to exchange initial disclosures no
later than October 6, 2015 (within 14 days after the conference). See CCMO and FED.R.CIV.P.
26(a)(1)(C). Plaintiff, however, failed to provide defendant(s) with her initial disclosures.
Furthermore, on October 4, 2016, Summit served plaintiff with its First Set of
Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. [doc. # 16]. Thus, plaintiff’s
1

As this motion is not one of the motions excepted in 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), nor
dispositive of any claim on the merits within the meaning of Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure, this ruling is issued under the authority thereof, and in accordance with the
standing order of this court. Any appeal must be made to the district judge in accordance with
Rule 72(a) and L.R. 74.1(W).

responses to the discovery requests were due no later than November 7, 2016.2 Moreover, in
anticipation of the timely receipt of plaintiff’s initial disclosures and discovery responses,
Summit noticed plaintiff’s deposition for November 17, 2016.
By early November, however, Summit still had not received plaintiff’s initial disclosures,
and so notified plaintiff’s counsel. See Nov. 1, 2016, Email exchange; M/Compel, Exhs. A-B.
On November 7, 2016, counsel for Summit again informed plaintiff’s counsel that he had not
received plaintiff’s initial disclosures, and that plaintiff’s discovery responses were due that date.
(Nov. 7, 2016, Email; M/Compel, Exh. C).
As of November 15, 2016, Summit still had not received plaintiff’s initial disclosures or
discovery responses, and thus, filed the instant motion to compel. Plaintiff did not file a response
to the motion, and the time do so has lapsed. See Notice of Motion Setting [doc. # 17].
Accordingly, the motion is deemed unopposed. Id.
Analysis
Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure specifies that, “[i]f a party fails to make a
disclosure required by Rule 26(a) any other party may move to compel disclosure and for
appropriate sanctions.” FED.R.CIV.P. 37(a)(3)(a). Similarly, a party seeking discovery may
move for an order compelling an answer, production, or inspection if a party, inter alia, fails to
answer an interrogatory or fails to produce requested documents. FED.R.CIV.P. 37(a)(3)(B)(iiiiv).
Considering plaintiff’s ongoing and unexplained failure to provide initial disclosures or
2

Interrogatories must be answered by the party to whom they are directed. FED.R.CIV.P.
33(b)(1)(A). A responding party must serve its answers and any objections within 30 days after
being served with interrogatories, unless the parties stipulate to a different deadline. Id. (b)(2).
Similarly, a party to whom requests for production are directed must respond in writing within 30
days after being served. FED.R.CIV.P. 34(2)(A).
2

discovery responses, the court finds that the motion to compel should be granted.
Conclusion
For the above-assigned reasons,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion to compel [doc. # 14] is hereby GRANTED. Within
the next fourteen (14) days from the date of this order, plaintiff Eva Miller shall provide
defendants with her Rule 26(a) initial disclosures and respond fully and completely to Summit’s
interrogatories and requests for production.3
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Summit shall have the right to reopen plaintiff’s
deposition, if necessary, following receipt of her initial disclosures and discovery responses.
In Chambers, at Monroe, Louisiana, this 12th day of December 2016.

__________________________________
KAREN L. HAYES
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3

By failing to timely respond to the discovery, and in the absence of good cause shown,
plaintiff has waived her right to object to the discovery requests. See In Re U.S., 864 F.2d 1153,
1156 (5th Cir. 1989).
3