Jackson v. Tapio, 19-C-1028. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Number: infdco20190920c70
Visitors: 11
Filed: Sep. 19, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 19, 2019
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM C. GRIESBACH , Chief District Judge . This matter comes before the court on Plaintiff's motion to compel. Plaintiff requests that the court order the defendants to fully respond to his discovery requests. Plaintiff's motion is deficient, however, because Plaintiff did not certify that he consulted with the defendants in an attempt to resolve the dispute before seeking relief from the court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1); Civil L.R. 37 (E.D. Wis.). Plaintiff should attempt to
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM C. GRIESBACH , Chief District Judge . This matter comes before the court on Plaintiff's motion to compel. Plaintiff requests that the court order the defendants to fully respond to his discovery requests. Plaintiff's motion is deficient, however, because Plaintiff did not certify that he consulted with the defendants in an attempt to resolve the dispute before seeking relief from the court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1); Civil L.R. 37 (E.D. Wis.). Plaintiff should attempt to c..
More
ORDER
WILLIAM C. GRIESBACH, Chief District Judge.
This matter comes before the court on Plaintiff's motion to compel. Plaintiff requests that the court order the defendants to fully respond to his discovery requests. Plaintiff's motion is deficient, however, because Plaintiff did not certify that he consulted with the defendants in an attempt to resolve the dispute before seeking relief from the court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1); Civil L.R. 37 (E.D. Wis.). Plaintiff should attempt to consult with the defendants to resolve this dispute before renewing his motion to compel.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to compel (Dkt. No. 26) and motion to determine the sufficiency of the defendants' request for admissions (Dkt. No. 28) are DENIED.
Source: Leagle
