THOMAS v. CITY OF GARY, 2:12cv532. (2014)
Court: District Court, N.D. Indiana
Number: infdco20141230d78
Visitors: 2
Filed: Dec. 29, 2014
Latest Update: Dec. 29, 2014
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER WILLIAM C. LEE, District Judge. This matter is before the court on a Report and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Paul R. Cherry. For the following reasons, the Report and Recommendation will be ADOPTED. Discussion On October 7, 2014, Magistrate Judge Cherry issued his Report and Recommendation regarding Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions [DE 30]. In this Report, Judge Cherry noted that the underlying discovery dispute was being resolved and thus drastic sanctions were not a
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER WILLIAM C. LEE, District Judge. This matter is before the court on a Report and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Paul R. Cherry. For the following reasons, the Report and Recommendation will be ADOPTED. Discussion On October 7, 2014, Magistrate Judge Cherry issued his Report and Recommendation regarding Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions [DE 30]. In this Report, Judge Cherry noted that the underlying discovery dispute was being resolved and thus drastic sanctions were not ap..
More
OPINION AND ORDER
WILLIAM C. LEE, District Judge.
This matter is before the court on a Report and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Paul R. Cherry. For the following reasons, the Report and Recommendation will be ADOPTED.
Discussion
On October 7, 2014, Magistrate Judge Cherry issued his Report and Recommendation regarding Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions [DE 30]. In this Report, Judge Cherry noted that the underlying discovery dispute was being resolved and thus drastic sanctions were not appropriate. However, Judge Cherry recommended that the court award Plaintiff reasonable costs (including attorney fees) caused by Defendants' failures. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(B).
The Defendants filed a response to the Report and Recommendation on October 21, 2014, noting that the underlying discovery problems arose from a breakdown in communication between replacement counsel and the Defendants, and that the problems were being rectified with no prejudice to Plaintiff. Defendants accept Judge Cherry's Recommendation that they bear the costs incurred by Plaintiffs due to the discovery dispute, and conclude that the Magistrate's Findings, Report and Recommendation should be approved and adopted by the Court.
Conclusion
On the basis of the foregoing the court hereby APPROVES and ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Cherry's October 7, 2014 Report and Recommendation [DE 39].
Source: Leagle
