Anderson v. Office Depot, Inc.

Filing 34

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 29 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge David S. Cayer on 10/18/2013. (blf)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:12-CV-00560-GCM-DSC
DEBORAH ANDERSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
OFFICE DEPOT, INC.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff’s “Motion to Compel” (document # 29)
filed September 20, 2013, as well as the parties’ briefs and exhibits.
This Motion has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§636(b)(1), and is now ripe for the Court’s consideration.

Having fully considered the

arguments, the record, and the applicable authority, the Court will grant in part and deny in part
Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel, as explained below.
Accepting the allegations of the Complaint as true, on February 15, 2010, Plaintiff
tripped and fell on a drainage mat outside the entrance to Defendant’s store. A large piece of
Styrofoam was trapped under the mat and caused Plaintiff’s fall. As a result, Plaintiff sustained a
broken arm and permanent nerve damage to her hand.
Plaintiff seeks to compel Defendant to provide complete responses to Interrogatories
numbered 2 and 3 in her First Set of Interrogatories. Specifically, Plaintiff seeks an order
compelling Defendant to produce:
information regarding notice of any claim or notice of any instance in which a
customer or employee was injured at the Office Depot store in question within the

past ten (10) years; the date and nature of the claim; the name, address, and
telephone number of the person so complaining; the name, address, and telephone
number of the employee or other person responsible causing the injury [sic]; and
whether the incident resulted in injury to any person.
Plaintiff’s “Memorandum … in Support …” at 1 (document #29-1). Plaintiff is entitled
to responses to all discovery requests reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible
evidence. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). The parties disagree on the temporal scope of Defendant’s
responses and whether Defendant must produce information about any incidents occurring inside
its store.
For the reasons stated in Plaintiff’s briefs, the Court concludes that Defendant must
produce information pertaining to incidents occurring inside as well as outside the store. For the
reasons set forth in Defendant’s brief, production will be limited to a five (5) year period and to
slip and fall and/or trip and fall incidents only.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff’s “Motion to Compel” (document # 29) is GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART. Within fifteen days of the date of this Memorandum and Order, Defendant
shall provide full and complete responses, as discussed above, to Interrogatory #2 and
Interrogatory #3 of Plaintiff’s First Set of Interrogatories.
2. The parties shall bear their own costs at this time.
3. The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to counsel for the parties, and to the
Honorable Graham C. Mullen.
SO ORDERED.

Signed: October 18, 2013