Jenkins v. Miller et al
Filing
450
OPINION AND ORDER granting 431 MOTION to Amend the Discovery Schedule/Order re: deadline to serve all interrogatories and requests to produce; granting 432 MOTION to Amend the Discovery Schedule/Order re: the Number of Depositions Plaintiffs Ar e Permitted ; denying as moot 440 Motion to Stay Discovery Deadlines; one modified proposed discovery schedule is to be submitted by dfts and pltfs within 60 days of this Order (by 2/7/2020). Signed by Judge William K. Sessions III on 1/7/2020. (jam)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
DISTRICT OF VERMONT
JANET JENKINS
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
v.
KENNETH L. MILLER ET. AL.,
Defendants.
Case No. 2:12-cr-184
OPINION AND ORDER: PLAINTIFFS’ MOTIONS TO AMEND THE DISCOVERY
SCHEDULE AS TO DEADLINES FOR INTERROGATORIES / REQUESTS TO
PRODUCE (ECF 431), PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO AMEND THE DISCOVERY
SCHEDULE AS TO THE NUMBER OF DEPOSITIONS PLAINTIFFS ARE
PERMITTED (ECF 432), AND DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY
DEADLINES (ECF 440)
Plaintiff Janet Jenkins, for herself and as next friend of
her daughter Isabella Miller-Jenkins, has brought suit against
several individuals and organizations, alleging that they
kidnapped and conspired to kidnap Isabella. Plaintiffs assert
claims of commission of, and conspiracy to, commit an
intentional tort of kidnapping and conspiracy to violate civil
rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3).
Plaintiffs have filed a motion to amend the discovery
schedule as to deadlines for interrogatories and requests to
produce (ECF 431) in order to correct a typographic error in the
Court’s Final Discovery Schedule/Order (ECF 425). ECF 431.
Plaintiffs have also filed a motion to amend the Final Discovery
Schedule/Order as to the number of depositions they are
1
permitted. ECF 432. Finally, Defendants have filed a motion to
stay the court’s discovery deadlines pending this Court’s
decision as to Gravel & Shea PC’s motion to withdraw as counsel.
ECF 435, 449.
For the following reasons, Plaintiffs’ motion to clarify
the discovery schedule as to deadlines for interrogatories and
requests to produce (ECF 431) is granted, and Plaintiffs’ motion
to amend the discovery schedule as to the number of depositions
they are permitted ECF 432) is granted.
In light of this Court’s decision to grant Gravel & Shea
PC’s motion to withdraw as counsel, giving Defendants 30 days
from the date of that order to obtain new counsel, the Court
orders Plaintiffs and Defendants to submit one modified proposed
discovery schedule within 60 days of this Order (by February 6,
2020), which should reflect any proposed changes to the schedule
that they deem necessary and agree upon after conferral. As
such, Defendants’ expedited motion to stay discovery deadlines
pending a decision (ECF 440) is denied as moot.
DISCUSSION
I.
Plaintiffs’ motion to clarify the discovery schedule as
to deadlines for interrogatories and requests to produce
(ECF 431) is granted.
First, Plaintiffs have filed a motion to amend the
discovery schedule as to deadlines for interrogatories and
2
requests to produce (ECF 431) in order to correct a
typographic error in the Court’s Final Discovery
Schedule/Order (ECF 425). In paragraph 1 of the November 25
Discovery Schedule/Order, the Court made a typographic error
in stating that the deadline to serve all interrogatories and
requests for production was “January 20, 2019” instead of
“January 20, 2020”, which is the correct deadline. Hence, the
Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion to amend the Court’s Discovery
Schedule/Order (ECF 425) to reflect a corrected deadline of
January 20, 2020 to serve all interrogatories and requests for
production.
II.
Plaintiffs’ motion to amend the discovery schedule as to
the number of depositions they are permitted (ECF 432) is
granted.
Plaintiffs have also filed a motion to amend the Final
Discovery Schedule/Order as to the number of depositions they
are permitted. ECF 432. In their motion, Plaintiffs cite an
outstanding disagreement between the parties as to whether they
are permitted to conduct depositions of each Defendant as well
as ten nonparty individuals, or whether they are only permitted
a sum total of ten depositions. ECF 432 1-3.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 30(a)(2)(A)(i), “a party
must obtain leave of court, and the court must grant leave to
the extent consistent with Rule 26(b)(1) and (2), if the parties
3
have not stipulated to the deposition and . . . the deposition
would result in more than 10 depositions being taken” by the
plaintiffs or defendants. Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 30(a)(2)(A)(i).
According to Rule 26(b)(1) and (2), parties may obtain discovery
of non-privileged matters relevant to any party's claim or
defense so long as they are proportional to the needs of the
case. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1).
Plaintiffs have successfully shown that an additional ten
nonparty depositions would serve the evidentiary needs of the
case. As they argue, this is a complex case involving
allegations of a broad conspiracy involving many individuals.
ECF 432 at 5. The ten nonparty depositions that Plaintiffs have
outlined in their motion are all relevant to central claims in
this litigation. ECF 432 at 5-6. Moreover, Plaintiffs are
limiting their request for additional depositions to ten
nonparty individuals, which is a reasonably contained quantity
proportional to the needs of this case. As such, Plaintiffs’
motion is granted.
III. Plaintiffs and Defendants are ordered to submit a single
modified proposed discovery schedule to the Court within
60 days of this Order
Finally, Defendants have filed a motion to stay the court’s
discovery deadlines pending this Court’s decision as to Gravel &
Shea PC’s motion to withdraw as counsel. ECF 435, 449. More
4
specifically, Defendants ask “that the Court stay all discovery
and deadlines in this matter until after the Court has
considered Gravel & Shea’s motion for leave to withdraw, and if
granted, for at least 30 days after the entry of appearance of
replacement counsel.” ECF 440 at 3. Defendants make this request
to allow replacement counsel sufficient time to engage in the
ongoing discovery process. ECF 440 at 1-2. Plaintiffs have not
voiced any apparent objection to this request. ECF 440 at 2. On
January 6, 2020, this Court granted Gravel & Shea PC’s motion to
withdraw as counsel by text order. ECF 449.
This Court recognizes and appreciates the obstacles posed
by withdrawal of defense counsel to the timely completion of
discovery as set out by the current Schedule/Order. The Court
also recognizes the importance of moving along the discovery
process with a finalized set of deadlines, especially
considering the numerous changes in the discovery schedule that
have occurred thus far in this litigation. In an effort to
minimize further back-and-forth regarding discovery, the Court
orders Defendants and Plaintiffs to submit one modified proposed
discovery schedule within 60 days of this Order (by February 7,
2020), which should reflect any proposed changes to the current
discovery deadlines (set out in the Court’s Final Discovery
Schedule/Order (ECF 425)) that they deem necessary and agree
upon after conferral. In the event that the parties are not able
5
to agree on a Final Amended Discovery Schedule/Order within 60
days, this Court will hold a hearing to facilitate final
agreement. This Order renders Defendants’ expedited motion to
stay discovery deadlines pending a decision (ECF 440) moot.
Hence, Defendants’ motion is denied.
CONCLUSION
For the aforementioned reasons, Plaintiffs’ motion to
clarify the discovery schedule as to deadlines for
interrogatories and requests to produce (ECF 431) is granted,
Plaintiffs’ motion to amend the discovery schedule as to the
number of depositions they are permitted (ECF 432) is granted,
and Defendants’ expedited motion to stay discovery deadlines
pending a decision (ECF 440) is denied as moot. The Court
further orders Plaintiffs and Defendants to submit one modified
proposed discovery schedule within 60 days of this Order
(February 7, 2020), which should reflect any proposed changes to
the current discovery deadlines.
DATED at Burlington, in the District of Vermont, this 7th
day of January, 2020.
/s/ William K. Sessions III
William K. Sessions III
District Court Judge
6
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?