Wolt et al v. Embankscape Equipment, LLC et al
Filing
113
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S SECOND MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY denying as moot 93 Motion to Compel. It is therefore ORDERED that RC Mowers's objections to Plaintiffs' Third Interrogatories and Third Requests for Production are OVERRULED, a nd Plaintiffs' request to compel full responses to those discovery requests is GRANTED. RC Mowers must serve its amended responses to those discovery requests, without any objections, by February 10, 2025. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Yvonne Y Ho) Parties notified. (rlw4)
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
§
Leon Wolt and Debra Wolt,
§
§
Plaintiffs,
§
§
v.
§
§
Embankscape Equipment, LLC §
d/b/a RC Mowers USA, Kar-Tech §
Inc., and Kar-Tech Global, Inc.,
§
§
§
Defendants.
January 28, 2025
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-02503
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S SECOND MOTION
TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
On January 2, 2025, Plaintiffs Leon and Debra Wolt filed a second
motion to compel certain discovery from Defendant Embankscape Equipment,
LLC d/b/a RC Mowers USA (“RC Mowers”).
Dkt. 93; see also Dkt. 111
(referring motion). Two categories of information are at issue.
According to the motion, RC Mowers’s submission of a motion for leave
to designate Mr. Wolt’s employer, Kinloch Equipment & Supply (“Kinloch”), as
a responsible third party (Dkt. 86) warrants compelling RC Mowers to produce
relevant documents regarding RC Mowers’s service training that was provided
or scheduled to be provided to Kinloch. See Dkt. 93 at 1-2. RC Mowers does
not dispute that this information is relevant and discoverable and agrees to
“produce additional documents, if any, that exist.”
Dkt. 108 at 1.
It is
ORDERED that, by February 10, 2025, which is less than a week before the
deadline for filing the joint pretrial order, see Dkt. 55 at 2, RC Mowers must
produce all such documents, including communications, related to training
provided or originally scheduled to be provided for Kinloch or its employees.
In light of RC Mowers’s agreement, Plaintiffs’ motion to compel production of
this information is DENIED AS MOOT.
As their second issue, Plaintiffs assert that RC Mowers failed to timely
respond to their third round of interrogatories and requests for production of
documents, which were served on November 12, 2024. See id. at 3. Those
latest discovery requests seek RC Mowers’s financial information that is
relevant to Plaintiffs’ request for punitive damages. See id. at 3-4.
RC Mowers acknowledges that its objections to Plaintiffs’ third requests
for production of documents were untimely but asks the Court to consider its
objections anyway. Dkt. 108 at 2. Its tardy assertion that this information
implicates privacy concerns—even if considered—is insufficient to avoid
producing the requested documents. 1
Although RC Mowers laundry-listed other objections in its belated discovery
responses, see Dkt. 93-3 at 3, 6, it has not renewed them in response to Plaintiffs’
motion to compel. The Court deems those other objections to be waived, both because
they were untimely asserted, see SS Charter Marine Corp. v. Unico Marine Servs.
LLC, 2024 Wl 3166939, at *1 (S.D. Tex. June 25, 2024) (failure to timely respond to
discovery requests waives a party’s objections, citing In re United States, 864 F.2d
1153, 1156 (5th Cir. 1989)), and because RC Mowers has failed to invoke those
objections here.
1
2
Plaintiffs’ request for exemplary damages places RC Mowers’s net worth
at issue.
See Lunsford v. Morris, 746 S.W.2d 471, 473 (Tex. 1998) (orig.
proceeding) (holding that net worth information “is relevant to the issue of
punitive or, as they are sometimes called, exemplary damages and therefore
discoverable”), overruled on other grounds, Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833,
842 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). It matters not that RC Mowers has moved
for summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ gross negligence claim. Neither Texas
courts nor federal courts applying Texas law require a party to make a
preliminary showing of entitlement to punitive damages before allowing networth discovery. See, e.g., Smith v. Detar Hosp. LLC, 2011 WL 6217497, at *8
(S.D. Tex. Dec. 14, 2011) (collecting numerous Texas and federal opinions for
this principle). Given that discovery closed last month—and the deadlines for
the joint pretrial order and docket call are approaching quickly, see Dkt. 55—
RC Mowers cannot justify its request to delay this discovery until its motion
for summary judgment is resolved.
It is therefore ORDERED that RC Mowers’s objections to Plaintiffs’
Third Interrogatories and Third Requests for Production are OVERRULED,
and Plaintiffs’ request to compel full responses to those discovery requests is
GRANTED. RC Mowers must serve its amended responses to those discovery
requests, without any objections, by February 10, 2025.
3
Signed on January 28, 2025, at Houston, Texas.
____
___
_________
___
_________________
__________________________________
Yv
vonne Y. Ho
o
Yvonne
United States Magistrate Judge
4
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?