Republic Fire and Casualty Insurance Company v. Azlin et al

Filing 229

ORDER re 223 MOTION to Supplement Disclosures and/or Discovery Responses to Add Additional Witness filed by Republic Fire and Casualty Insurance Company. Signed by Jane M Virden on 12/13/2012. (sef)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
GREENVILLE DIVISION
REPUBLIC FIRE AND CASUALTY
INSURANCE COMPANY

PLAINTIFFS

V.

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 4:10-cv-37-SA-JMV

MARK AZLIN D/B/A THE BOURBON MALL;
THE BOURBON MALL, INC.

DEFENDANT

ORDER
This cause is before the court on the plaintiff's motion to supplement initial disclosures
and/or discovery responses to disclose an additional witness (#223). Specifically, Movant seeks
to substitute Richard Mayer, CPCU, CIC, ARM, AU, Vice President-Commercial Lines for
Republic Fire Casualty Insurance Company, in place of previously identified employee witness
Rick Reynolds. Mr. Reynolds left his employment with Republic in August and has since taken
another job in Dallas, Texas, outside the subpoena power of this court, and he remains
noncommital about his trial availability. Movant has offered an affidavit of the potential
substitute witness Richard Mayer. Having reviewed the record, the motion, the briefs of the
parties, and the applicable law, and having heard oral argument, the court finds as follows:
For the reasons announced by the court on the record at the conclusion of the motion
hearing on December 12, 2012, the court finds that the motion is well taken and should be
GRANTED with the following parameters and clarifications:
•

The plaintiff must use commercially reasonable and diligent efforts to produce
the original witness, Mr. Reynolds, at trial, and his availability shall be
determined by the time of the pretrial conference.

•

Should those efforts prove futile, plaintiff's substitute witness, Mr. Richard Mayer,
will be deemed to have been identified in the initial disclosures on the matters
identified in the affidavit of Mr. Mayer docketed as document #226-1.

•

Discovery will not be reopened and all evidentiary rulings will be preserved for
the District Judge to determine admissibility at trial.

SO ORDERED this, the 13th day of December, 2012.

/s/Jane M. Virden
U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2