Filed: Mar. 23, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 23, 2012
Summary: ORDER SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, Magistrate Judge. This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Defendant Leon Kaplan and to Compel Deposition of Robert G. Menzies, Esq. (Doc. #95) filed on December 6, 2011. Defendant's Response (Doc. #97) was filed on March 15, 2012. Thus, the Motion is now ripe for review. First, Plaintiff moves to compel the deposition of Defendant. More specifically, Plaintiff requests that the Court compel Defendant to return to
Summary: ORDER SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, Magistrate Judge. This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Defendant Leon Kaplan and to Compel Deposition of Robert G. Menzies, Esq. (Doc. #95) filed on December 6, 2011. Defendant's Response (Doc. #97) was filed on March 15, 2012. Thus, the Motion is now ripe for review. First, Plaintiff moves to compel the deposition of Defendant. More specifically, Plaintiff requests that the Court compel Defendant to return to F..
More
ORDER
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, Magistrate Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Defendant Leon Kaplan and to Compel Deposition of Robert G. Menzies, Esq. (Doc. #95) filed on December 6, 2011. Defendant's Response (Doc. #97) was filed on March 15, 2012. Thus, the Motion is now ripe for review.
First, Plaintiff moves to compel the deposition of Defendant. More specifically, Plaintiff requests that the Court compel Defendant to return to Florida for his deposition in March, 2012 or to appear for telephonic deposition in March, 2012. Plaintiff asserts that he has been attempting to compel the deposition of Defendant for several months. This Court previously found that Defendant was not required to sit for his deposition in Florida following the mediation and denied Plaintiff's request to compel the deposition following that mediation. (Doc. #83). The Court subsequently extended the discovery deadline in this matter to April 16, 2012, so that additional depositions could be taken, including that of the Defendant. The Court notes that the Parties briefing on this issue is a back and forth as to why and who is to blame for the fact that Defendant's deposition has not yet been taken. The Court will no longer entertain such banter. Defendant's deposition must be taken by the discovery deadline, whether in person or telephonically. The Court notes from a review of the docket sheet that Defendant's deposition is currently set for April 11, 2012. (Doc. #101). Therefore, the request to compel the deposition of Defendant is due to be denied as moot. In the event that the deposition does not go forward, Plaintiff may re-file a motion with the Court if required.
Second, Plaintiff moves to compel the deposition of Robert G. Menzies, Esq., an attorney with defense counsel's law firm. Plaintiff provides no argument in his Motion as to the grounds or basis upon which Mr. Menzies — an attorney — should be deposed in this matter. Therefore, the request is due to be denied.
Accordingly, it is now ORDERED:
(1) Plaintiff's Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Defendant Leon Kaplan and to Compel Deposition of Robert G. Menzies, Esq. (Doc. #95) is DENIED AS MOOT in part and DENIED in part.
a. Plaintiff's request to compel the deposition of Defendant is DENIED AS MOOT.
b. Plaintiff's request to compel the deposition of Robert G. Menzies, Esq. is DENIED.
(2) Plaintiff's request for costs and attorney's fees for this Motion is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED.
