Johnson et al v. Wickersham et al

Filing 46

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S 37 Motion to Compel Deontay Johnson's Reappearance to Continue Deposition. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen. (Ciesla, C)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DEONTAY JOHNSON, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs,

No. 13-13672

v.

District Judge Matthew F. Leitman
Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen

ANTHONY WICKERSHAM, ET AL.,
Defendants.
/
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Compel Deontay Johnson’s
Reappearance to Continue Deposition [Doc. #37].
Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(c)(2), a deponent may object on the record to questions, but
may refuse to answer only “when necessary to preserve a privilege, to enforce a limitation
ordered by the court, or to present a motion under Rule 30(d)(3).” Defendants’ attorney
questioned Plaintiff regarding his criminal record. Plaintiff refused to answer and
terminated the deposition.
Information regarding criminal convictions is not privileged. Nor do these
questions reveal bad faith such that the Plaintiff could properly terminate the deposition
under Rule 30(d)(3). A party’s criminal record is a proper area of inquiry. See Fed.R.Ev.
609(a).
Plaintiff improperly refused to answer questions regarding his criminal history and
improperly terminated his deposition. Therefore, Defendants’ motion to compel his
appearance to continue the deposition [Doc. #37] is GRANTED. Defendants shall renotice Plaintiff’s deposition within 45 days of the date of this Order.
-1-

Plaintiff’s failure to appear for his re-deposition may subject him to sanctions,
including dismissal of his complaint.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/R. Steven Whalen
R. STEVEN WHALEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Date: September 24, 2014
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record on
September 24,2014, electronically and/or by U.S. mail.
s/Carolyn M. Ciesla
Case Manager to the
Honorable R. Steven Whalen

-2-