Future Field Solutions, LLC et al v. Van Norstrand
Filing
174
Summary Opinion and Order Regarding Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Mark Coulson on 10/23/2024. (heps, Deputy Clerk)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
Future Field Solutions, LLC et al.,
*
Plaintiffs
*
vs.
Erik Van Norstrand,
Defendant
*
Case No.
1:23-cv-01301-DKC
*
******
SUMMARY OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY
The undersigned has this case on referral from Judge Chasanow for discovery and related
scheduling. (ECF No. 35). On October 7, 2024, Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff 1 alerted the Court
to a discovery issue. (ECF No. 160). The parties submitted their respective positions on October
11, 2024, pursuant to the Court’s discovery management order. (ECF Nos. 168 and 169). In
short, Defendant sought a supplementation of Plaintiff, Future Field Solutions’ (“FFS”) previous
discovery responses. Plaintiffs raised additional matters in their submission, including whether
the previously-scheduled settlement conference should go forward and to what extent discovery
should be re-opened to accommodate the addition of PeriArchon as a party.
The Court held a hearing on this matter on October 22, 2024, making several determinations on
the record. These are summarized below.
First, Plaintiff FFS is ordered to supplement its previous document production for any
documents not previously produced as to each of the categories requested in Defendant’s
Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff is also identified as “Third-Party Plaintiff” in pleadings, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.Proc.
14(a). However, adding a party via Rule 14 is limited to instances of derivative liability, i.e., claims that a non-party
shares in whole or in part in any liability an original defendant has to a plaintiff. In this case, the added third party,
PeriArchon, is actually a Counter-Co-Defendant, i.e. one whom Counter-Plaintiff Norstrand alleges is liable along
with the named counter-defendants. Therefore, PeriArchon, should have been joined through Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 13(h),
not 14(a). Given that the parties are treating PeriArchon in the functional capacity of Counter-Co-Defendant, the
Court will ignore this procedural misnomer.
1
position letter by November 8, 2024. Second, discovery is reopened until January 31, 2025, to
allow the parties to gather information relevant to allegations concerning FFS and/or its
principals diverting or transferring contracts, business opportunities, assets, etc. to the newly
added PeriArchon. The Court emphasized that, other than the required supplementation of
previous discovery responses (including those referenced above), the additional discovery period
was limited in scope as described above and was not an opportunity to revisit or re-open previous
discovery. Finally, the parties inquired into whether the scheduled settlement conference before
Magistrate Judge Austin was going forward in December. The Court instructed the parties to
follow up with Judge Austin regarding any changes to the settlement conference date.
10/23/2024
Date
J. Mark Coulson
United States Magistrate Judge
2
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?