Amtrust Bank v. Hodge et al
Filing
155
ORDER granting 148 Motion to Compel as to George Alderdice (SEE ATTACHED). Ordered by Magistrate Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 5/6/2011. (Figeroux, Davina)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------X
AMTRUST BANK,
09CV3234 (CBA) (ALC)
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING
MOTIONS TO COMPEL
v.
MICHAEL HODGE, et al.,
Defendants.
-------------------------------------------------X
CARTER, United States Magistrate Judge:
In this mortgage fraud action, plaintiff Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as receiver
for AmTrust Bank (“Plaintiff”) propounded its Second Set of Requests for the Production of
Documents and Second Set of Interrogatories on defendant George R. Alderdice (“Alderdice”)
on June 23, 2010. Having received no response, Plaintiff made several attempts to communicate
with counsel for Alderdice by both telephone and e-mail in furtherance of agreeing on a date for
Alderdice’s production without need for intervention by the Court. On September 13, 2010,
counsel for Alderdice informed Plaintiff that he would be withdrawing from the action, and that
Alderdice, an attorney duly licensed to practice law in the State of New York, would be
proceeding on a pro se basis.1
Aderdice has effectively disappeared since relieving his attorney of record. On
November 16, 2010, at a conference at which he failed to appear, I was informed that his former
counsel was unable to reach him despite several attempts. Sua sponte, I granted Alderdice
1
On October 4, 2010, Alderdice wrote a letter to his former counsel (thereafter filed with the
Court) advising of his intent to proceed pro se and also filed with this Court a Consent to Change
Attorneys. (Docket No. 143.) This letter made no mention of the outstanding discovery or of
Plaintiff’s motion to compel, which by then had been filed.
1
additional time (until December 31, 2010) and ordered him to respond to Plaintiff’s outstanding
motion, notice of which he received via the Court’s Electronic Case Filing System (“ECF”).
Two subsequent letters, dated January 1, 2011 and January 28, 2011, from Plaintiff’s counsel
indicated that Alderdice still had not responded to the discovery requests. (Docket Nos. 146147.)
A second motion to compel was filed against Aderdice on February 22, 2011, this time
by co-defendant Morningstar Abstract, LLC (“Morningstar”). (Docket No. 148.) No response
followed by Alderdice, who remained truant throughout the subsequent February 24, 2011 and
April 6, 2011 conferences, and since then he has failed to appear. At the February 24
conference, William Joseph Smith (“Smith”), former counsel for Alderdice intimated that an
undisclosed medical and/or psychological condition may be preventing Alderdice’s furtherance
of the action and payment of outstanding bills to Smith. In addition to counsel’s fruitless
attempts, I personally made attempts, including contacting the address and telephone number
Alderdice has listed as his business address in his October 25, 2010 letter; the address registered
with the Appellate Division of the Second Department; and internet searches for both his places
of business and residence. All led to telephone numbers that are out-of-service. On April 6,
2011, I mailed a copy of the docket and Plaintiff’s motion to compel to an address in Manhasset,
New York, which, while owned by an individual named Robert Alderdice, appears to be
inhabited by Defendant Alderdice as well. No response followed.
CONCLUSION
Alderdice’s filing of a notice of appearance means that he has personally received copies
of all filings in this action via ECF since October 25, 2010, yet has made no effort to respond,
2
even with the bare minimum of an explanation of why he is unable to further discovery. For the
foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s motion to compel is GRANTED; Morningstar’s motion to compel
is GRANTED; and Plaintiff shall file a motion for default judgment against Defendant Alderdice
within thirty days of the entry of this order.
SO ORDERED.
DATED: May 6, 2010
Brooklyn, New York
____________/s/__________________
Andrew L. Carter, USMJ
3
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?