The Adam Group, Inc. of Middle Tennessee v. Tunnell et al

Filing 72

ORDER granting 33 , 34 , 35 , 40 and 48 Motions to Quash; denying as moot 39 Motion to Stay and 55 Motion for Protective Order; granting 42 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery and 65 Motion for status conference an d to extend all deadlines pending decision on application for entry of default and all outstanding discovery motions. Counsel are hereby directed to confer and to file by October 3, 2014, a proposed revised case management order containing pretrial deadlines to govern the progress of this case toward trial. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 9/22/14. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
THE ADAM GROUP, INC. OF MIDDLE
TENNESSEE d/b/a PLAYMAKER CRM,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff
v.
DANIEL CHRISTOPHER TUNNELL,
KEAGAN BROWN, ANNIE TUNNELL
McDANIEL, and KARL DUMAS,
Defendants

No. 3:13-0258
Judge Sharp/Bryant
Jury Demand

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Court has recently denied Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss and has returned the case to the undersigned Magistrate
Judge

for

further

pretrial

management

and

consideration

of

outstanding discovery motions (Docket Entry No. 62).
Pending in this case are five motions filed by Defendants
and nonparty deponents seeking to quash deposition subpoenas served
by Plaintiff requiring depositions and document production in
February and March 2014 (Docket Entry Nos. 33, 34, 35, 40, and 48).
These motions seek to quash subpoenas for depositions of Michael G.
Bailey,

Derrick

Barker

and

HomeCare

CRM,

LLC,

respectively.

Multiple grounds are asserted for quashing these deposition notices
including, but not limited to, timeliness and lack of sufficient
notice,

overbreadth

of

the

document

production

requests,

duplication of discovery sought and previously produced in a
related action among many of these same parties presently pending
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Georgia (“the Atlanta action”), and the pendency of Defendants’
motion to dismiss. Plaintiff has responded in opposition to these

motions (Docket Entry Nos. 36 and 54), and have stated their
willingness to reschedule depositions for more convenient times and
to narrow the scope of their requests for production of documents.
Because the time for responding to these subpoenas has
now passed and because Plaintiff has indicated a willingness to
reschedule

depositions

and

to

narrow

document

requests,

the

undersigned Magistrate Judge GRANTS Defendants’ motions to quash
subpoenas for Michael G. Bailey, Derrick Barker and HomeCare CRM,
LLC as previously served (Docket Entry Nos. 33, 34, 35, 40 and 48).
This ruling is without prejudice both to Plaintiff’s right to serve
new subpoenas upon these three deponents and to Defendants’ and the
deponents’ rights to raise objections to such new subpoenas. The
parties are encouraged to work together to schedule all their
discovery

in

a

matter

calculated

to

minimize

scheduling

difficulties and unnecessary expense.
Defendants have also filed their motion to stay discovery
(Docket Entry No. 39), and a later motion for protective order
(Docket Entry No. 55). Both of these motions are premised, at least
in part, upon the pendency of their motion to dismiss this action.
Since the Court has since denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss,
these two motions are DENIED as moot. Defendants shall serve
responses to the written discovery served in February 2014 and
referenced in their motion for protective order by October 22,
2014.
Finally, Plaintiff has filed its motion to extend the
deadline for discovery (Docket Entry No. 42) and motion for status
conference

and

to

extend

all

deadlines
2

pending

decision

on

application for entry of default and all outstanding discovery
motions (Docket Entry No. 65). These two motions are GRANTED.
Counsel are hereby directed to confer and to file by October 3,
2014, a proposed revised case management order containing pretrial
deadlines to govern the progress of this case toward trial.
It is so ORDERED.
/s/ John S. Bryant
JOHN S. BRYANT
United States Magistrate Judge

3