LeBLANC v. SUNSET MANAGEMENT, INC., 3:16-577-SVH (2016)
Court: District Court, D. South Carolina
Number: infdco20160819c73
Visitors: 10
Filed: Aug. 18, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 18, 2016
Summary: SHIVA V. HODGES , Magistrate Judge . This matter comes before the court on the motions of Sunset Management, Inc. and Wayne Greene ("Defendants") to compel Beverly LeBlanc and Laressa B. Brantley ("Plaintiffs") to produce responses to Defendants' First Set of Interrogatories and First Set of Requests for Production served on May 23, 2016. [ECF No. 17]. The motion indicates that the discovery requests were duly served and that full and complete responses have not been made within the time pre
Summary: SHIVA V. HODGES , Magistrate Judge . This matter comes before the court on the motions of Sunset Management, Inc. and Wayne Greene ("Defendants") to compel Beverly LeBlanc and Laressa B. Brantley ("Plaintiffs") to produce responses to Defendants' First Set of Interrogatories and First Set of Requests for Production served on May 23, 2016. [ECF No. 17]. The motion indicates that the discovery requests were duly served and that full and complete responses have not been made within the time pres..
More
SHIVA V. HODGES, Magistrate Judge.
This matter comes before the court on the motions of Sunset Management, Inc. and Wayne Greene ("Defendants") to compel Beverly LeBlanc and Laressa B. Brantley ("Plaintiffs") to produce responses to Defendants' First Set of Interrogatories and First Set of Requests for Production served on May 23, 2016. [ECF No. 17]. The motion indicates that the discovery requests were duly served and that full and complete responses have not been made within the time prescribed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26. Plaintiffs' deadline to respond to the discovery requests, after several extensions, was July 28, 2016. Id. Defense counsel represents that Plaintiffs has not answered or responded to the discovery requests. Id.
In light of the foregoing, the court grants Defendant's motion to compel. Plaintiff is directed to provide responses to the discovery requests by September 1, 2016. Because Plaintiff failed to timely respond to the discovery, any and all objections are deemed waived under Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(4). If Plaintiffs fail to provide the responses as directed herein, the court will grant a request for fees and costs by Defendants through a motion accompanied by an affidavit setting out the time expended in connection with the motion to compel and the hourly rate that the client has been billed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
