Williamson v. Steele et al

Filing 55

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant Corizon Inc.s motion to quash subpoena is DENIED without prejudice. Doc. 36 . Signed by District Judge Charles A. Shaw on 2/12/2014. (RAK)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION LAMONT WILLIAMSON, Plaintiff, v. TROY STEELE, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 4:12-CV-1548 CAS MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on defendant Corizon Inc.’s motion to quash subpoena. Eastern District Local Rule 3.04(A) provides with respect to motions concerning discovery and disclosure: The Court will not consider any motion relating to discovery and disclosure unless it contains a statement that movant’s counsel has conferred in person or by telephone with the opposing counsel in good faith or has made reasonable efforts to do so, but that after sincere efforts to resolve their dispute, counsel are unable to reach an accord. This statement also shall recite the date, time and manner of such conference, and the names of the individuals participating therein, or shall state with specificity the efforts made to confer with opposing counsel. E.D. Mo. L.R. 3.04(A) (emphasis added). Defendant’s motion contains no certificate regarding counsel’s efforts to resolve this discovery disputes. The Local Rules require a conference in person or by telephone, along with details concerning the conference, or a statement of the reasonable efforts made to confer in person or by telephone. The sending of correspondence concerning discovery is insufficient to constitute a good faith attempt to resolve the dispute under the local rule. As a result of defendant’s failure to comply with Local Rule 3.04(A), the Court will not consider the instant motion and will deny the same without prejudice. Furthermore, the parties are reminded that the Court addresses disputed discovery motions only at its monthly discovery motion docket. In the future, counsel for the moving party should contact chambers for the date and time of the next discovery motion docket. Pursuant to the undersigned’s Judge’s Requirements, the moving party must file and serve a notice of hearing setting a disputed motion on the discovery docket at least seven (7) days in advance of the docket. See http://www.moed.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/cas.pdf. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant Corizon Inc.’s motion to quash subpoena is DENIED without prejudice. [Doc. 36] CHARLES A. SHAW UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated this 12th day of February, 2014. 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?