O'Mara v. Hillsborough County Department of Corrections, Superintendent et al

Filing 47

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 43 Motion to Compel Interrogatory Answers. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge James R. Muirhead. (jab)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Timothy M. O'Mara v. Hillsborough County Department of Corrections, Superintendent, et al. Civil No. 08-cv-51-SM

ORDER

Defendants move to compel further answers to interrogatories claiming some answers were inadequate. respond. Plaintiff did not

Each contested interrogatory is considered in turn. Defendant complains that plaintiff did

Interrogatory #1.

not "provide his education, fields of employment, and last job/employer." a. b. Plaintiff is ordered to supplement to identify:

What school he went to in 11th grade; His last job/employer prior to his 2002 disability. Description of physical altercations and

Interrogatory #2. verbal exchanges.

Defendants have failed to show any relevance

or likelihood that the information would lead to admissible evidence. Denied. Describe every arrest, crime charge, stop

Interrogatory #3.

or detention.

Denied as overbroad and irrelevant.

This is not

the stuff of Rule 609 impeachment and has nothing to do with the case. It is abusive in the context of a pro se plaintiff. Next

time I see this question it will cost counsel a fine. Interrogatory #4. Civil claims, including divorce and Irrelevant, overbroad and abusive.

administrative proceeding. Denied. Interrogatory #6. Interrogatory #7.

Denied.

Take his deposition.

Denied as his answer clearly incorporates

his medical records, which are in defendant's custody. Interrogatory #8. Unless defendants provide him with copies

of his complaint and his motions to amend, they must rely on them. Denied. Defendant is ordered to supply copies of

Interrogatory #9.

all grievances and requests and seek plaintiff's confirmation of them. Otherwise denied. Employers from seven years back are

Interrogatory #11. irrelevant. Denied.

Interrogatory #12. file.

Provide plaintiff a copy of his inmate

Plaintiff is then ordered to answer the question. Provide him the disciplinary reports.

Interrogatory #15.

2

Plaintiff is then ordered to answer the question. Interrogatory #16. what he doesn't know. Interrogatory #17. aware . . .." Plaintiff cannot be compelled to answer Denied. Plaintiff states "Mr. O'Mara was

Plaintiff is ordered to answer what it was that Granted in part, denied in part.

Mr. O'Mara should have done. Interrogatory #19.

If plaintiff maintained copies of his

correspondence, he is to provide a copy of each one except those mailed to N.H. Legal Assistance, NH Public Defenders, ACLU or NH ACLU, which I presume to be privileged. If he kept no copies, he

is ordered to provide his best recollection. Interrogatory #20. Interrogatory #21. Denied. This is overbroad.

Denied except as to felonies and

misdemeanors involving an element of dishonesty or false statement, only as to those convictions within the last ten (10) years. Plaintiff is to provide his best recollection. Denied as grossly overbroad.

Interrogatory #24.

The motion (document no. 43) is granted in part and denied in part. Counsel would do well to reread N.H. Rules of

Professional Conduct Rule 3.4 and the New Hampshire Bar Association Litigation Guidelines 7.A or be prepared to write a

3

big check if she serves any more abusive interrogatories. SO ORDERED. ____________________________________ James R. Muirhead United States Magistrate Judge Date: June 18, 2009 cc: Timothy M. O'Mara, pro se John A. Curran, Esq. Elizabeth L. Hurley, Esq.

4