Leonard v. Earth Solutions, Inc.
Filing
34
ORDER: After a hearing in this matter on 4/24/2014, the motion to compel discovery and Rule 26 initial disclosures 19 is DENIED as moot. Likewise, the Magistrate Judge declines to award attorneys' fees for either side in this matter. Trial is reset for 2/3/2015. Judge Trauger will issue a separate order concerning her requirements for trial and for the final pretrial conference. As discussed with the parties, all discovery in this matter will be completed by 6/30/2014. Dispositive motions will be due July 28, 2014. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe Brown on 4/25/14. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt) Modified on 4/25/2014 (dt).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
RICHARD LEONARD,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff
v.
EARTH SOLUTIONS, INC.,
Defendant
No. 3:13-0699
Judge Trauger/Brown
Jury Demand
O R D E R
Presently
pending
before
the
undersigned
is
the
Plaintiff’s motion to compel and for sanctions and attorneys’ fees
for the failure of the Defendant to comply with discovery deadlines
(Docket Entry 19).
After a hearing in this matter on April 24, 2014, the
motion to compel discovery and Rule 26 initial disclosures is
DENIED as moot. Likewise, the Magistrate Judge declines to award
attorneys’ fees for either side in this matter.
As the Magistrate Judge noted during the hearing, there
is a serious failure to communicate between the parties in this
case. In the future, before filing anything the parties need to
actually confer with each other. Emails are simply not cutting it.
The Defendant has now provided the discovery, although
somewhat belatedly. Both sides seem to have treated answers to
pleadings and discovery responses much like the Russians and United
States exchanging prisoners across the Berlin bridge. Each side
contended they could not do something because they were waiting on
the other side. Of course, with this scenario, nothing gets done.
Given
Judge
Trauger’s
express
instructions
about
discovery being furnished by the close of business on January 31,
2014, Defendant’s counsel would have been well-advised to have sent
the discovery to the Plaintiff before normal close of business on
the
31st.
The
Defendant’s
argument
that
technically
he
fully
complied by making material available misses the point of getting
the job done. Additionally, when the Plaintiff did advise that he
would be willing to take the discovery on a disc, despite the
Defendant’s promise that it was ready, it still took another 10
days to actually do it.
On the other hand, had the parties actually talked to
each other they could well have been able to work the matter out a
lot quicker without the necessity of filing a new motion the day
after the discovery was due.
The Magistrate Judge then discussed with the parties what
would need to be changed in the scheduling order itself. As he
advised the parties, he discussed this matter with Judge Trauger
and she has advised that she will reset this matter for trial on
February 3, 2015. Judge Trauger will issue a separate order
concerning her requirements for trial and for the final pretrial
conference.
As discussed with the parties, all discovery in this
matter will be completed by June 30, 2014. The parties are reminded
that written discovery must be served at least 30 days before that
2
deadline in order to be timely. At the present time the parties did
not think they would be using experts.
Dispositive motions will be due July 28, 2014. Responses
to dispositive motions shall be filed within 28 days after service.
Optional replies shall be filed within 14 days after service of the
response. Page limitations for briefs and optional replies will
remain as previously set by Judge Trauger. If dispositive motions
are
filed
early,
the
response
and
reply
dates
are
moved
up
accordingly.
The parties advised that they would be submitting their
report on alternative dispute resolution to Judge Trauger on April
25, 2014, as originally scheduled.
It is so ORDERED.
/s/
Joe B. Brown
JOE B. BROWN
United States Magistrate Judge
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?