The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
Previously pending on this court's law and motion calendar for March 15, 2012, was defendant's motion to dismiss, filed January 25, 2012, and plaintiff's motion to compel discovery, filed November 14, 2011. Defendant Callaway appeared in pro se. Plaintiff was represented by Erik Roper. These motions will be resolved in an explanatory order to be issued on a later date; however, because time is of the essence in regard to the motion to compel, the instant summary order is issued with respect to that motion.
Defendant responded to plaintiff's first set of discovery with blanket objections and erroneous legal authority. Defendant will be permitted to amend his responses so long as he does so in good faith and exercises reasonable diligence in obtaining responses. Defendant shall conduct a thorough and good faith search for all documents in his custody, possession or control responsive to plaintiff's requests, and shall respond to all discovery requests to the best of his knowledge based upon a reasonable investigation. Failure to properly respond to the discovery requested will result in sanctions, including the possibility of some or all admissions being deemed admitted.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's motion to compel, filed November 14, 2011, (dkt. no. 49), is granted.
2. Defendant shall respond to the following discovery propounded by plaintiff by March 31, 2012:
a. First Set of Requests for Admissions numbered 1-16, 19-22.
b. First Set of Requests for Production of Documents (all requests).
c. First Set of Interrogatories (all interrogatories).
3. Failure to respond timely and completely and without blanket objections to the aforementioned discovery will result in sanctions.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw ...