Davis v. City of Shelby, Mississippi et al
Filing
24
ORDER granting 23 Motion to Compel. Plaintiff shall have seven (7) days from the date of entry of this order to execute a waiver of the medical privilege and fully and completely respond to the outstanding discovery that is the subject of Defendants Motion to Compel. Signed by Jane M Virden on 10/30/13. (ncb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
GREENVILLE DIVISION
JUSTIN DAVIS
PLAINTIFF
VS.
NO. 4:13CV126-SA-JMV
CITY OF SHELBY, MISSISSIPPI, ET AL.
DEFENDANTS
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
COMPEL DISCOVERY RESPONSES
Before the court is the Motion to Compel of Defendants, The City of Shelby,
Mississippi; Patrick Johnson; Kevin Craig; and Ricardo Tell, filed on October 10, 2013
[ECF 23]. In support of the motion Defendants state Plaintiff has failed to timely
respond to written discovery requests and has failed to execute a waiver of the medical
privilege (a requirement stated in this court’s September 5 Case Management Order
[14]). Defendants also state that by all appearances, while Plaintiff’s counsel has made
efforts to obtain his client’s cooperation in responding to the discovery, all attempts
have been unsuccessful because counsel has lost contact with his client. Plaintiff has
filed no response to the instant motion. It is, therefore,
ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Compel is hereby granted, and Plaintiff
shall have seven (7) days from the date of entry of this order to execute a waiver of the
medical privilege and fully and completely respond to the outstanding discovery that is
the subject of Defendants’ Motion to Compel. Plaintiff is warned that failure to timely
1585790
comply with this order could result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of
this action.
SO ORDERED this, the 30th day of October, 2013.
/s/ Jane M. Virden
U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
1585790
2
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?