Koshani v. Barton, 3:17-CV-265-TWP-HBG. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20180702d44
Visitors: 14
Filed: Jun. 29, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 29, 2018
Summary: ORDER H. BRUCE GUYTON , Magistrate Judge . This case is before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c), the Rules of this Court, and Standing Order 13-02. The parties appeared telephonically before the Court on June 28, 2018, over a discovery dispute. Attorneys Daniel Marino and Tillman Finley appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. Attorneys Garrett Swartwood and Michael Maloney appeared on behalf of Defendants. During the discovery conference, the parties reported that they have made pr
Summary: ORDER H. BRUCE GUYTON , Magistrate Judge . This case is before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c), the Rules of this Court, and Standing Order 13-02. The parties appeared telephonically before the Court on June 28, 2018, over a discovery dispute. Attorneys Daniel Marino and Tillman Finley appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. Attorneys Garrett Swartwood and Michael Maloney appeared on behalf of Defendants. During the discovery conference, the parties reported that they have made pro..
More
ORDER
H. BRUCE GUYTON, Magistrate Judge.
This case is before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the Rules of this Court, and Standing Order 13-02.
The parties appeared telephonically before the Court on June 28, 2018, over a discovery dispute. Attorneys Daniel Marino and Tillman Finley appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. Attorneys Garrett Swartwood and Michael Maloney appeared on behalf of Defendants. During the discovery conference, the parties reported that they have made progress on resolving several discovery disputes, such as their agreement to reopen Defendant Eric Barton's deposition and the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition on a limited basis. The Court acknowledges that the parties have participated in good-faith discussions in an attempt to resolve the discovery issues. After hearing from the parties, however, the Court finds that the best course of action is to allow the parties to engage in motion practice with respect to the remaining discovery disputes. The Court encourages the parties to continue their discussions regarding the discovery disputes and further finds that the parties may postpone reopening the above depositions until the Court rules on the remaining discovery disputes. Accordingly, the Court instructs Plaintiff to file his motion to compel on or before July 13, 2018. Defendants shall file their response brief within fourteen (14) days of Plaintiff's motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
