Almeida v. Bokf, NA, 17-CV-126-JED-FHM. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. Oklahoma
Number: infdco20190719c60
Visitors: 6
Filed: Jul. 18, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 18, 2019
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER FRANK H. McCARTHY , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff's Motion for Early Discovery Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1), [Dkt. 33], has been fully briefed and is before the court for decision. Plaintiffs seek permission to depose two of Plaintiffs' proposed class representatives in order to preserve their testimony. Plaintiffs contend this is necessary because they are 77 and 76 years old and suffer from general health issues related to aging. No specifics of any hea
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER FRANK H. McCARTHY , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff's Motion for Early Discovery Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1), [Dkt. 33], has been fully briefed and is before the court for decision. Plaintiffs seek permission to depose two of Plaintiffs' proposed class representatives in order to preserve their testimony. Plaintiffs contend this is necessary because they are 77 and 76 years old and suffer from general health issues related to aging. No specifics of any heal..
More
OPINION AND ORDER
FRANK H. McCARTHY, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff's Motion for Early Discovery Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1), [Dkt. 33], has been fully briefed and is before the court for decision. Plaintiffs seek permission to depose two of Plaintiffs' proposed class representatives in order to preserve their testimony. Plaintiffs contend this is necessary because they are 77 and 76 years old and suffer from general health issues related to aging. No specifics of any health issues are provided.
Plaintiffs further contend that the testimony is essential to class certification, damages, and all other aspects of the case. Again, no specifics are provided.
Plaintiffs have not provided sufficient specific information to establish good cause for early discovery. Plaintiffs' Motion for Early Discovery Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1), [Dkt. 33], is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
