State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Angelo et al
ORDER granting Plaintiff's 84 Motion to Compel Non-Parties Norman Dehko and Lincoln International LLC to comply; granting Plaintiff's 85 Motion to Compel Non-Party Somerset Auto Body of MI to Comply and Plaintiff shall file a Bill of costs by 11/23/2020, Response by 11/30/2020. Signed by District Judge Robert H. Cleland. (LWag)
Case 3:19-cv-10669-RHC-APP ECF No. 96, PageID.5964 Filed 11/17/20 Page 1 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE
Case No. 19-10669
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS TO COMPEL
Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company brings this action
under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. §
1962(c) and (d), common law fraud, and unjust enrichment. (ECF No. 1, PageID.55-63.)
It moves to compel non-parties Norman Dehko, Lincoln International LLC / 1-800-PAIN800, and Somerset Auto Body of MI, Inc., (collectively “Respondents”) to comply with
subpoenas Plaintiff issued under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45. (ECF Nos. 84, 85.)
Plaintiff filed its motions to compel on October 27, 2020. Respondents had
fourteen days to file a response. E.D. Mich. L.R. 7.1(e)(2)(B). The deadline expired on
November 10, 2020, and no response was filed. The claims in Plaintiff’s motions are
well supported. Respondents do not present arguments in opposition, and the motions
will be granted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a).
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(5)(A) states that if a motion to compel is
granted, “the court must, after giving an opportunity to be heard, require the party . . .
Case 3:19-cv-10669-RHC-APP ECF No. 96, PageID.5965 Filed 11/17/20 Page 2 of 3
whose conduct necessitated the motion, the party or attorney advising that conduct, or
both to pay the movant's reasonable expenses incurred in making the motion, including
attorney's fees.” “The award of costs is the norm, rather than the exception.” Martinez v.
Blue Star Farms, Inc., 325 F.R.D. 212, 220 (W.D. Mich. 2018). The court is inclined to
award Plaintiff expenses. It will order Plaintiff to file a bill of costs and account for its
reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred in the filing of the motions to
compel. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A). Respondents will have the opportunity to file
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s “Motion to Compel Non-Parties Norman Dehko
and Lincoln International LLC / 1-800-PAIN-800 to Comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 45
Subpoenas” (ECF No. 84) is GRANTED. Respondents Dehko and Lincoln International
LLC / 1-800-PAIN-800 are DIRECTED to produce all documents responsive to Plaintiff’s
subpoenas (ECF Nos. 84-13, 84-14) and execute certificates of search in the forms
attached to Plaintiff’s motion (ECF Nos. 84-21, 84-22) by December 7, 2020.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s “Motion to Compel Non-Party
Somerset Auto Body of MI, Inc., to Comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 Subpoenas” (ECF
No. 85) is GRANTED. Respondent Somerset Auto Body of MI, Inc., is DIRECTED to
produce all documents responsive to Plaintiff’s subpoena (ECF No. 85-8) and execute a
certificate of search in the form attached to Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 85-11) by
December 7, 2020.
Finally, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff file a bill of costs by November 23, 2020.
Respondents Dehko, Lincoln International LLC / 1-800-PAIN-800, and Somerset Auto
Body of MI, Inc., may file responsive briefs by November 30, 2020.
Case 3:19-cv-10669-RHC-APP ECF No. 96, PageID.5966 Filed 11/17/20 Page 3 of 3
s/Robert H. Cleland
ROBERT H. CLELAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: November 17, 2020
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record
on this date, November 17, 2020, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
Case Manager and Deputy Clerk
S:\Cleland\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C2 ORDERS\19-10669.ANGELO.MotionstoCompelNon-Parties.RMK.docx
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?