Filed: May 28, 2013
Latest Update: May 28, 2013
Summary: ORDERS PATRICK J. HANNA, Magistrate Judge. On Tuesday, May 28, 2013, the undersigned magistrate judge heard oral arguments on three discovery motions filed by Plaintiff: Motion to Compel Discovery Responses[Rec. Doc. 40], Motion to Compel Depositions of Crew Members [Rec. Doc. 50], and Motion to Compel Vessel Inspection [Rec. Doc. 51]. After considering the memoranda of the parties on all motions, and based on the representations of the parties that a vessel inspection has been scheduled for
Summary: ORDERS PATRICK J. HANNA, Magistrate Judge. On Tuesday, May 28, 2013, the undersigned magistrate judge heard oral arguments on three discovery motions filed by Plaintiff: Motion to Compel Discovery Responses[Rec. Doc. 40], Motion to Compel Depositions of Crew Members [Rec. Doc. 50], and Motion to Compel Vessel Inspection [Rec. Doc. 51]. After considering the memoranda of the parties on all motions, and based on the representations of the parties that a vessel inspection has been scheduled for J..
More
ORDERS
PATRICK J. HANNA, Magistrate Judge.
On Tuesday, May 28, 2013, the undersigned magistrate judge heard oral arguments on three discovery motions filed by Plaintiff: Motion to Compel Discovery Responses[Rec. Doc. 40], Motion to Compel Depositions of Crew Members [Rec. Doc. 50], and Motion to Compel Vessel Inspection [Rec. Doc. 51]. After considering the memoranda of the parties on all motions, and based on the representations of the parties that a vessel inspection has been scheduled for June 29, 2013, and that they have agreed on the arrangements for the requested depositions of crew members who are under the control of Omega, to be scheduled on Saturdays, beginning in late June, 2013 without the necessity of subpoena;
IT IS ORDERED THAT the motion presented in Rec. Doc. 51 is DENIED as moot;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, the motion to compel depositions [Rec. Doc. 50] is similarly DENIED as moot;
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff's motion to compel production [Rec. Doc. 40] of statements of crew members taken shortly after the incident at issue by an investigator hired by the defendant is DENIED for the present, on Plaintiff's failure to meet the burden imposed by Rule 26(b)(3)(A) to show substantial need and inability, without undue hardship, to obtain the substantial equivalent by other means.
