United States of America v. $88,029.08, More or Less, in United States Currency
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER directing Dr. Hoover to appear at her deposition, as previously ordered by the United States Magistrate Judge on 8/12/2011; the 8/12/2011, directive and its cautionary language are reproduced in pertinent part, as more fully set forth herein. Signed by Judge John T. Copenhaver, Jr. on 8/24/2011. (cc: attys; any unrepresented parties by facsimile and priority overnight delivery) (mkw)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Civil Action No. 2:10-1087
$88,029.08, More or Less,
in United States Currency,
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending is an August 23, 2011, filing by interested
parties Katherine A. Hoover, M.D., and John F. Tomasic styled
“NOTICE THAT THIS CASE HAS BEEN DISMISSED (“notice”).”
The notice appears based upon the court’s August 8,
2011, dismissal of a consolidated case, United States v.
$27,671.50, more or less in United States currency, No.
2:11-0101, attached to this matter.
The interested parties
conclude that dismissal of the consolidated case necessarily
resulted in the dismissal of this lead action.
appears designed to excuse Dr. Hoover’s attendance at her August
30, 2011, deposition.
(See, e.g., Notice at 1 (“Therefore, there
is no legal reason to depose Dr. Hoover.
The United States
Attorney has used the media to harass and defame Dr. Hoover and
her husband John F. Tomasic and will attempt to use the
deposition, which can not [sic] legally be held, for an improper
Inasmuch as the notice lacks any legal basis, it is
without any legal effect.
Dr. Hoover is directed to appear at
her deposition, as previously ordered by the United States
Magistrate Judge on August 12, 2011.
The August 12, 2011,
directive and its cautionary language are reproduced in pertinent
It is hereby ORDERED that the Motion to Compel, as
amended, is granted, and it is further ORDERED that
interested party Katherine Anne Hoover, M.D. shall
appear at the office of the United States Attorney, 300
Virginia Street East, Room 4000, Charleston, West
Virginia, on Tuesday, August 30, 2011, at 10:00 a.m.,
Eastern Daylight Time, and shall testify at her
deposition in this action, pursuant to the provisions
of Rule 30, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Interested party Katherine Anne Hoover, M.D. is
hereby placed on NOTICE that should she fail to appear
and testify as ordered, she will be subjecting herself
to the imposition of sanctions, as specified in Rule
37, which may include one or more of the following:
1. Entry of an order requiring her to pay the
reasonable expenses, including attorney’s
fees, caused by her failure to appear on July
12, 2011 and August 30, 2011;
2. Entry of an order that designated facts
(such as those set forth in the Verified
Complaint of Forfeiture) be taken as
established for purposes of the action;
3. Entry of an order prohibiting Katherine
Anne Hoover, M.D. from opposing the claims of
the United States;
4. Entry of an order prohibiting Katherine
Anne Hoover, M.D. from introducing designated
matters in evidence;
of an order striking pleadings in
in part, such as Katherine Anne
verified response to the complaint
6. Entry of an order staying further
proceedings until the order is obeyed;
7. Entry of an order rendering default
judgment against Katherine Anne Hoover;
8. Entry of an order treating as contempt of
court the failure to obey this Order granting
the Motion to Compel, as amended.
United States v. $88,029.08, more or less, in United States
currency, 2:10-1087 (S.D. W. Va. Aug. 12, 2011).
The Clerk is directed to forward copies of this order
to (1) all counsel of record via the CM/ECF system, and (2) any
unrepresented parties by either facsimile or priority overnight
DATED: August 24, 2011
John T. Copenhaver, Jr.
United States District Judge
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?