DeLorean v. Coach, Inc.
ORDER on 40 , 43 and 44 Discovery Motions. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Case No. 15-cv-13704
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman
ORDER ON DISCOVERY MOTIONS (ECF ## 40, 43, 44)
Currently before the Court are three discovery motions: (1) Plaintiff’s Motion
to Compel Discovery as to Goal Information (ECF # 40, hereinafter the “Goal
Motion”); (2) Defendant’s Motion to Determine Sufficiency of Plaintiff’s
Objections and Answers to Its Requests for Admission and to Compel Answers to
Interrogatories (ECF #43, hereinafter the “Admissions and Interrogatories Motion”);
and Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery (ECF #44, hereinafter the “Motion to
Compel”). The Court held a hearing on the motions on January 26, 2017. For the
reasons stated on the record, the Court rules as follows:
The Goal Motion: Defendant shall answer sub-parts C and D of
Interrogatory number 5. Defendant may answer by directing Plaintiff to documents
containing information sufficient to enable Plaintiff to determine the answers to the
questions posed in sub-parts C and D. In its answers, Defendant must direct Plaintiff
to the specific documents to be used in answering the questions; must identify the
dates for each such document; and must provide Plaintiff with an explanation of the
formula and/or methodology that Plaintiff should apply to the information reflected
in the documents in order to determine the answers to the questions. Defendant shall
state in its answer, as its counsel indicated on the record at the hearing, that the
formula and/or methodology provided is, to the best of Defendant’s knowledge, the
most accurate way to determine the answers to the questions posed in sub-parts C
The Admissions and Interrogatories Motion: Defendant shall revise and
re-serve requests Requests for Admission 5, 11-15, 17-23. The revised requests shall
eliminate the reference in the original request to the “factual basis” and shall seek
admissions of factual statements (e.g., “admit that a certain store had the lowest sales
volume during year XXXX”). Defendant may accompany each revised request for
admission with an interrogatory to be answered in the absence of an unqualified
admission. The accompanying interrogatories may ask Plaintiff to identify the facts
contradicting the truth of the requested admission. With respect to all of the other
discovery requests addressed in this motion, the Court adopts the agreement of the
parties as placed on the record during the hearing.
The Motion to Compel: As stated on the record during the hearing, the
parties have resolved all disputes addressed in this motion, and the Court adopts the
resolution as placed on the record.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: February 2, 2017
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the
parties and/or counsel of record on February 2, 2017, by electronic means and/or
s/Holly A. Monda
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?