DeLorean v. Coach, Inc.

Filing 54

ORDER on 40 , 43 and 44 Discovery Motions. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ELIZABETH DELOREAN, Plaintiff, Case No. 15-cv-13704 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman v. COACH, INC., Defendant. _________________________________/ 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: 1. 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 1 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 and D. 2. 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. 2 3. 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 ordinary mail. s/Holly A. Monda Case Manager (313) 234-5113 3

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?