AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges

LEASA R. HACKETT, Plaintiff, v. ARLINGTON HOTEL CO., INC., Defendant.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

BOBBY SHEPHERD, Magistrate Judge

Before the undersigned is the motion of the defendant for an order compelling the plaintiff to respond to discovery requests. (Doc. #10) From the motion, the brief in support and the record herein, it is found and ordered as follows:

1. On January 17, 2006, defendant served upon the plaintiff its motion to compel accompanied by a brief in support thereof. (Doc. #10 11) Defendant alleges that it served upon plaintiff interrogatories and request for production of documents on October 13, 2005, but that plaintiff has not responded to the interrogatories or the request for production of documents in the time provided by law.

2. Defendant further alleges that it has attempted to resolve this discovery dispute without the intervention of the court but that this has proven impossible.

3. As of the date of entry of this order, the plaintiff has failed to file a response to the motion to compel.

4. Defendant's motion to compel has been referred to the undersigned for disposition. (Doc. #12))

5. Rule 7.2(b), Rules of the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas provides that any party opposing a motion shall serve and file with the clerk a concise statement in opposition to the motion within eleven days from the date the motion was served upon that party.

6. Rule 7.2(f), Rules of the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas provides that the "failure to timely respond to any nondispositive motion, as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, or by any local rule, shall be an adequate basis, without more, for granting the relief sought in said motion."

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS FOUND AND ORDERED that the defendants' motion to compel discovery should be and is granted. The plaintiff is ordered to serve upon the defendant complete responses to the defendant's discovery requests within eleven (11) days of the date of this order.

FURTHER, the defendant should be and is hereby awarded its costs with respect to this motion as against the plaintiff.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HACKETT v. ARLINGTON HOTEL CO., INC. (W.D.Ark. 2006)
(Feb 1, 2006)