Moore v. Advance Stores Company, Incorporated

Filing 21

ORDER granting 12 Motion to Compel. Signed by Senior Judge Graham Mullen on 11/15/11. (gpb) Modified on 11/15/2011 to correct linkage(gpb).

IN THE UNITED STATED DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
Civil Action No. 3:10-cv-00377

RICHARD MOORE,
Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

ADVANCE STORES COMPANY, INC.
d/b/a ADVANCE AUTO PARTS,
Defendant.

This matter is before the court upon Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel pursuant to Rule 37 of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Specifically, Plaintiff seeks an Order compelling
Defendant to provide full and complete responses to Plaintiff’s Interrogatory Number 14 and
Request for Production of Documents Number 12 and 46.
Plaintiff, a former store manager for the Defendant, filed this suit alleging claims of race
discrimination and retaliation. One of Plaintiff’s allegations is that he was treated more harshly
than other similarly situated store managers with regard to disciplinary actions. In Interrogatory
Number 14 and Request for Production Number 12, Plaintiffs seeks disciplinary actions issued by
his supervisor, Wes Davis, to other store managers in Davis’ district during the period of
Plaintiff’s employment (June 2006 through June 2009). Despite Defendant’s objections, the court
finds that Plaintiff’s requests are not overly broad, unduly burdensome, or irrelevant. The
requests are appropriately limited to similarly situated individuals, that is, other store managers

that worked in Plaintiff’s supervisor’s district. Moreover, the information sought is directly
relevant to Plaintiff’s claims of disparate treatment.
Plaintiff’s Request for Production Number 46 seeks a copy of store management review
forms for store managers supervised by Mr. Davis during the period of Plaintiff’s employment.
Defendant objected on much the same grounds as cited in its response to Interrogatory Number
14 and Request for Production Number 12. The court likewise finds the information requested to
be appropriately limited in scope and relevant in that such documents may provide comparative
data relevant to proving that Plaintiff was subjected to disparate treatment.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel is hereby GRANTED,
and Defendant is hereby ordered to produce forthwith all performance reviews and disciplinary
actions issued to other store managers supervised by Mr. Davis during the period of Plaintiff’s
employment and any subsequent amended or redacted version. Plaintiff is directed to file an
affidavit setting forth the amount of attorney’s fees and costs incurred in the filing of this motion.

Signed: November 15, 2011