Filed: Dec. 06, 2019
Latest Update: Dec. 06, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RESCIND SANCTIONS Re: Dkt. 136 THOMAS S. HIXSON , Magistrate Judge . On October 22, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff LegalForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C.'s motion for sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b) after Defendant Chris Demassa failed to comply with two orders compelling him to produce financial records to LegalForce's outside counsel. ECF No. 132. The Court ordered Demassa to pay LegalForce's fees and costs in the amount of $2,000 and, until
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RESCIND SANCTIONS Re: Dkt. 136 THOMAS S. HIXSON , Magistrate Judge . On October 22, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff LegalForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C.'s motion for sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b) after Defendant Chris Demassa failed to comply with two orders compelling him to produce financial records to LegalForce's outside counsel. ECF No. 132. The Court ordered Demassa to pay LegalForce's fees and costs in the amount of $2,000 and, until ..
More
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RESCIND SANCTIONS Re: Dkt. 136
THOMAS S. HIXSON, Magistrate Judge.
On October 22, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff LegalForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C.'s motion for sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b) after Defendant Chris Demassa failed to comply with two orders compelling him to produce financial records to LegalForce's outside counsel. ECF No. 132. The Court ordered Demassa to pay LegalForce's fees and costs in the amount of $2,000 and, until Demassa complied with his discovery obligations, fined him a daily sanction in the amount of $100. As part of its order, the Court granted Demassa permission to move to vacate the $100 daily sanction once he complied in full with his discovery obligations.
On November 1, 2019, Demassa filed a "Request to Rescind $2,000 Sanction," stating he has "performed to [the Court's] order in full." ECF No. 136. However, the Court did not grant Demassa permission to move to vacate the $2,000 sanction; it only granted permission as to the $100 daily sanction. Further, the Court imposed the $2,000 sanction because LegalForce had to file multiple motions for sanctions. Regardless of whether Demassa has now complied with his discovery obligations, such compliance would have no effect on the amount LegalForce was forced to spend on those motions. Accordingly, Demassa's motion is DENIED as to the $2,000 sanction.
To the extent Demassa seeks to vacate the $100 daily sanction, there is no indication he has produced the underlying financial information for his 2019 financials as ordered. See Order at 8:10-14 (ordering Demassa to produce his "sales and expense information from the company's bank account, receipts and credit card statements" for the years for which he did not have tax returns); Tarabichi Decl. ¶ 2, ECF No. 139-1 ("Demassa provided a 2018 Schedule C tax return (Profit or Loss From Business) and a single page for 2019 financials labeled `Chris Demassa 2019 (as of 09-30-2019).'" Accordingly, Demassa's motion to vacate the $100 daily sanction is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.1
IT IS SO ORDERED.
