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)

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