Coleman et al v. Speedway LLC et al

Filing 32

ORDER signed by Judge J P Stadtmueller on 2/4/2019. 31 Defendant Speedway LLC's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiff Eric Coleman's Complaint (Docket #1-3) is DISMISSED with prejudice. 4 Involuntary Plaintiff Blue Cross Blue Shield of Wisconsin's claim and cross-claim are DISMISSED without prejudice. (cc: all counsel, via mail to Eric Coleman) (jm)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
ERIC COLEMAN,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 18-CV-636-JPS

v.
BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF
WISCONSIN, doing business as
ANTHEM BLUE CROSS AND BLUE
SHIELD, MOLINA HEALTHCARE
OF WISCONSIN INC., and HOME
DEPOT WELFARE BENEFITS PLAN,
Involuntary Plaintiffs,

ORDER

v.
SPEEDWAY LLC and ABC
INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendants.

This is a slip-and-fall action arising from an incident involving
Plaintiff Eric Coleman (“Coleman”) at a convenience store in Milwaukee,
Wisconsin owned by Defendant Speedway LLC (“Speedway”). (Docket #1).
The case was originally filed in Milwaukee County Circuit Court and was
removed to this Court on April 20, 2018. Id. At that time, Coleman was
represented by counsel. On June 7, 2018, Coleman’s counsel moved for
leave to withdraw, and the magistrate judge then presiding over the action
granted the motion. (Docket #12). Plaintiff has been proceeding pro se since
then.

On July 18, 2018, the case was reassigned to this branch of the Court,
and a scheduling conference was held shortly thereafter. (Docket #22).
Coleman appeared by telephone for the conference. Id. After the conference,
the Court issued a comprehensive trial scheduling order which included,
for Coleman’s benefit, copies of certain procedural rules and a monograph
prepared by court staff to address common questions that arise in pro se
civil litigation. (Docket #23).
On September 28, 2018, Speedway filed a motion to compel
discovery responses from Coleman. (Docket #25). Speedway explained that
Coleman had not provided responses to its discovery requests or his initial
disclosures as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a). (Docket
#26). Coleman did not respond to the motion to compel. Therefore, on
November 2, 2018, the Court granted Speedway’s motion and ordered that
Coleman provide his initial disclosures and responses to Speedway’s
discovery requests within fourteen days. (Docket #30). The Court explained
that if Coleman failed to do so, this action would be dismissed without
further notice. Id.
On December 12, 2018, Speedway filed a motion to dismiss under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, explaining that Coleman still had not
provided Speedway with initial disclosures or responses to their discovery
requests. (Docket #31). Coleman has not responded to Speedway’s motion
to dismiss, and the time for him to do so has long since passed. See Civ. L.
R. 7(b).
The dismissal of a case as a Rule 37 discovery sanction is appropriate
when the court finds willfulness, bad faith, or fault on the part of the
defaulting party. Brown v. Columbia Sussex Corp., 664 F.3d 182, 190–91 (7th
Cir. 2011). Coleman’s failure to provide initial disclosures and responses to
Page 2 of 4

Speedway’s discovery requests, even after being ordered to do so by the
Court, amounts to bad-faith, contumacious conduct. See Watkins v. Nielsen,
405 F. App’x 42, 44 (7th Cir. 2010) (dismissal of pro se plaintiff’s action under
Rule 37 was appropriate where plaintiff failed to timely and completely
respond to discovery, produced no documents, and failed to attend the final
pretrial conference despite a court order to appear). Coleman was on notice
that this case would be dismissed if he failed to comply with the Court’s
order that he produce the discovery Speedway sought. Further, Coleman
has not attempted to defend his conduct by filing a response to Speedway’s
motion to dismiss. The Court will, therefore, grant Speedway’s motion and
dismiss his complaint.
Finally, because the claim and cross-claim filed by involuntary
plaintiff Blue Cross Blue Shield of Wisconsin is contingent upon the success
of Coleman’s claim, such claim and cross-claim will be dismissed without
prejudice.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant Speedway LLC’s motion to dismiss
(Docket #31) be and the same is hereby GRANTED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Eric Coleman’s complaint
(Docket #1-3) be and the same is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice; and
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Involuntary Plaintiff Blue Cross
Blue Shield of Wisconsin’s claim and cross-claim (Docket #4) be and the
same is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

Page 3 of 4

Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 4th day of February, 2019.
BY THE COURT:

J.P. Stadtmueller
U.S. District Judge

Page 4 of 4