Sabol-Krutz v. Quad Electronics,Inc.

Filing 61

ORDER DENYING IN PART and Addressing Additional Discovery Issues re: 58 Motion for Protective Order (see Image for dates)--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
STACEY SABOL-KRUTZ,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 2:15-cv-13328
District Judge Nancy Edmunds
Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti

QUAD ELECTRONICS,
INC.,
Defendant.
_________________________/
ORDER DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE
ORDER (DE 58) AND ADDRESSING ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY ISSUES
COUNSEL MUST READ THE FULL CONTENTS OF THIS ORDER
CAREFULLY AND IMMEDIATELY
I.

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
On March 27, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for protective order and to quash

subpoenas and the taking of depositions, seeking to prevent the depositions of
Oscar Ferrari and Ann Verdick from occurring on March 28, 2017. (DE 58.) I
noticed this matter for a telephonic status conference to occur on March 29, 2017,
which subsequently became an on the record telephonic hearing, in which
Plaintiff’s attorney, Mark Dickow, and Defendant’s attorneys, Heidi Sharp and
Peter Camps appeared remotely. During the status conference, the parties were
prepared to argue the motion. For the reasons stated on the record, Plaintiff’s

motion is DENIED, except with respect to the scope of documents to be produced,
as explained below.
Accordingly, the depositions of Oscar Ferrari and Ann Verdick must take
place by April 15, 2017. Although discovery is set to close on April 3, 2017, the
Court will allow a brief extension for the limited purpose of completing these
depositions, and for the other limited purposes set forth below. These deponents
are directed to produce Plaintiff’s employment contracts, documents containing her
wage information, and documents that reference Defendant or its products,
including, but not limited to, DC Power Cable. Deponents need not produce
Plaintiff’s personnel file, nor is it necessary for them to produce email or
correspondence which do not fall within the scope of the preceding sentence. A
copy of this order must be served on these deponents or their counsel forthwith.
II.

ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY ISSUES
Notices for any further depositions, as specifically referenced in this Order,

must be served by March 31, 2017, as it would not constitute reasonable notice to
serve them any closer to the previously established discovery cutoff. Plaintiff
informed the Court that he intended to take four additional depositions: (1)
Defendant’s IME expert; and, the re-depositions of (2) Dan Tomica, (3) Mary
Jenuwine, and (4) Bryan Kadrich. As Plaintiff’s counsel has had the IME report
for a significant amount of time and has not yet noticed the deposition of the IME
2

expert, he will be required to abide by the April 3, 2017 discovery deadline, unless
Defendant stipulates to an extension. As to the re-depositions, the Court will allow
Plaintiff until April 30, 2017 to complete them. If Defendant is unwilling to
produce those deponents, it must file a motion for protective order on or before
April 7, 2017.
Any other motions to compel or motions for protective orders must be filed
by April 15, 2017. The dispositive motion deadline will be extended to June 1,
2017. The deadline for witness lists will not be extended. Discovery is not
generally extended, except as specifically addressed in this Order. The dates for the
final pretrial conference and trial, as well as the deadline for filing a final pretrial
order are unaffected by this Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 29, 2017

s/ Anthony P. Patti
Anthony P. Patti
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record
on March 29, 2017, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail.
s/Michael Williams
Case Manager for the
Honorable Anthony P. Patti

3