Filed: Jan. 27, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 27, 2020
Summary: ORDER (ECF No. 162) KENDALL J. NEWMAN , Magistrate Judge . This case concerns Plaintiff's allegations of wrongful revocation of his real estate license, as against individual employees of the Department ("Bureau") of Real Estate. 1 ( See ECF No. 136 at p. 2.) In December 2019, Defendant moved to compel Plaintiff, currently proceeding pro se, to sit for an oral deposition. (ECF No. 153.) The Court granted the motion, ordered the parties to confer by January 21, 2020, on potential dates, a
Summary: ORDER (ECF No. 162) KENDALL J. NEWMAN , Magistrate Judge . This case concerns Plaintiff's allegations of wrongful revocation of his real estate license, as against individual employees of the Department ("Bureau") of Real Estate. 1 ( See ECF No. 136 at p. 2.) In December 2019, Defendant moved to compel Plaintiff, currently proceeding pro se, to sit for an oral deposition. (ECF No. 153.) The Court granted the motion, ordered the parties to confer by January 21, 2020, on potential dates, an..
More
ORDER
(ECF No. 162)
KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.
This case concerns Plaintiff's allegations of wrongful revocation of his real estate license, as against individual employees of the Department ("Bureau") of Real Estate.1 (See ECF No. 136 at p. 2.) In December 2019, Defendant moved to compel Plaintiff, currently proceeding pro se, to sit for an oral deposition. (ECF No. 153.) The Court granted the motion, ordered the parties to confer by January 21, 2020, on potential dates, and ordered the deposition be held sometime prior to February 6, 2020. (ECF No. 161.)
On January 24, Defendants requested an extension of time on the date to confer. (ECF No. 162.) Defense Counsel represented he emailed Plaintiff on January 15, proposing eight potential dates for the deposition. (Id. at p. 6.) On January 21, Plaintiff responded by email, stating he has "arranged to substitute an attorney in this matter and possible appeal." (Id. at p. 9.) Plaintiff's email states "[t]he attorney should be in contact with you shortly this week." (Id.) However, the letter does not provide any information about this attorney, save for a Cc: to "Mr. Wright." (Id.) Defense Counsel responded, informing Plaintiff that if he is in fact represented by counsel, the rules bar him from communicating directly with Plaintiff. (Id. at p. 11.) Defense Counsel requested Plaintiff provide the attorney's contact information, but states that as of January 24, neither Plaintiff nor any attorney has responded. (Id. at p. 3, ¶ 4.)
Given Plaintiff's previous delays, the Court is skeptical of Plaintiff's representations concerning any potential attorney. (See ECF No. 158 at fn. 3.) However, the Court is sensitive— generally speaking—to matters of client representation. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED:
1. Defendants' motion for extension of time on the meet and confer requirement (ECF No. 162) is GRANTED;
2. Plaintiff is ORDERED to submit the name and contact information of his "substituted attorney" to both the Court and to Defense Counsel no later than Thursday, January 30, 2020, at 2:00 p.m.;
3. Regardless of whether Plaintiff has been successful at obtaining counsel, both he and any potential attorney are informed that the Court's prior order compelling Plaintiff to sit for an oral deposition (ECF No. 161) remains in full effect. Plaintiff shall sit for an oral deposition sometime prior to February 6, 2020;
4. The hearing on Plaintiff's Motion to Alter or Amend (ECF No. 152) remains set for February 13, 2020, at 10:00 A.M., with a briefing schedule defined by Local Rule 230; and
5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve this order on Plaintiff at the email address listed in ECF No. 162 Exhibit 2, and is further directed to serve this order on Plaintiff by priority mail with delivery confirmation to Plaintiff's address.
