Wilson v. Sabatka-Rine et al
Filing
48
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying the Plaintiff's 45 Motion to Compel and denying 45 the Motion for Default Ruling. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(MKR)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
HAROLD B. WILSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
DIANE SABATKA-RINE, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
4:11CV3215
MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel and for Default
Ruling. (Filing No. 45.) Defendants have filed a Brief in Opposition. (Filing No.
46.) For the reasons discussed below, Plaintiff’s Motion is denied.
In his Motion, Plaintiff states that he “submitted” interrogatories in July 2012,
but did not receive answers from Defendants. (Filing No. 45 at CM/ECF p. 1.)
Plaintiff also asks the court to enter a “default ruling” because Defendants failed to
answer his Complaint in a timely manner. (Id.)
In contrast, Defendants argue that they timely answered Plaintiff’s Complaint
and first received the interrogatories at issue as an attachment to Plaintiff’s Motion
to Compel and for Default Ruling. (Filing No. 46.) Defendants also argue that
Plaintiff has failed to comply with NECivR 7.0.1(i), which provides that this court
will only consider a discovery motion in which the moving party shows that, after
personal consultation with opposing parties and sincere attempts to resolve
differences, the parties cannot reach an accord. (Id.)
After careful review, the court finds that Plaintiff failed to show that
Defendants had notice of his interrogatories before he filed his Motion to Compel, or
that he consulted with Defendants’ counsel to resolve any dispute regarding his
interrogatories. Moreover, Plaintiff’s request for a “default ruling” is without merit
as Defendants timely filed their answer.
Accordingly,
(See Filing Nos. 32, 34 and 45.)
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel and for
Default Ruling (filing no. 45) is denied.
DATED this 16th day of November, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
United States District Judge
*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The
U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend,
approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on
their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties
or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or
functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or
directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
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?