RESICOM CUSTOM PAINTING AND MAINTENANCE, INC. v. PROFESSIONAL RETAIL SERVICES, INC., 14 C 9190. (2017)
Court: District Court, N.D. Illinois
Number: infdco20170720874
Visitors: 8
Filed: Jul. 19, 2017
Latest Update: Jul. 19, 2017
Summary: MEMORANDUM ORDER MILTON I. SHADUR , Senior District Judge . This Court, regrettably away from its chambers because of the rehabilitation process following wholly unanticipated surgery, has had printed out for its review "Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Compel the Production of Requested Documents" (Dkt. No. 77) filed by Resicom Custom Painting and Maintenance, Inc. ("Resicom"). Although this Court is not issuing a final ruling on those matters pending a response
Summary: MEMORANDUM ORDER MILTON I. SHADUR , Senior District Judge . This Court, regrettably away from its chambers because of the rehabilitation process following wholly unanticipated surgery, has had printed out for its review "Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Compel the Production of Requested Documents" (Dkt. No. 77) filed by Resicom Custom Painting and Maintenance, Inc. ("Resicom"). Although this Court is not issuing a final ruling on those matters pending a response ..
More
MEMORANDUM ORDER
MILTON I. SHADUR, Senior District Judge.
This Court, regrettably away from its chambers because of the rehabilitation process following wholly unanticipated surgery, has had printed out for its review "Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Compel the Production of Requested Documents" (Dkt. No. 77) filed by Resicom Custom Painting and Maintenance, Inc. ("Resicom"). Although this Court is not issuing a final ruling on those matters pending a response from defendant Professional Retail Services, Inc. ("PRS"), the Resicom portrayal of events — particularly but not solely its recital of the arbitrary conduct and high-handed position advanced by PRS' attorney John Ray ("Ray") to bring this lawsuit to a halt while he took an extended vacation in Sweden (what he has described as his "customary trip to Sweden from late June to late July")1 — clearly calls for the action that is ordered here pending the final ruling:
1. Resicom is not required to produce the "Requested Documents" referred to in PRS' "Motion To Compel the Production of Requested Documents" (Dkt. No. 72).
2. This Court's discovery deadline is extended beyond August 1, 2017 to a date, to be determined later, to allow the depositions sought by Resicom to be taken (if indeed those depositions are to be required at all).
Accordingly this Court orders those two steps to be taken pending further notice. And because Resicom's submissions have posed what appear to be some quite reasonable alternatives to resolve the parties' differences without the need for judicial involvement in procedural wrangles that will further prolong this nearly three-year-old lawsuit, the parties are urged to meet and confer in an effort to resolve those differences.
FootNotes
1. For attorney Ray's information, the operative principle in this judicial district (and in every other federal district to this Court's knowledge) is for the assigned judge, and not a lawyer advocate, to prescribe the ground rules (including timetables) for the conduct of litigation on the judge's calendar.
Source: Leagle
