Brown v. Ramona Brockett, CCB-11-240. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Maryland
Number: infdco20180207a63
Visitors: 22
Filed: Feb. 06, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 06, 2018
Summary: MEMORANDUM CATHERINE C. BLAKE , District Judge . Plaintiff Jordan Brown has filed a motion for leave to conduct post-judgment discovery in aid of execution. In response, defendant Dr. Ramona Brockett has filed a motion to dismiss with prejudice and quash deposition. Brown's motion will be granted and defendant's motion will be denied. This case proceeded to trial on October 15, 2013, and this court entered an amended judgment for Brown against Brockett in the amount of $40,000. Costs were
Summary: MEMORANDUM CATHERINE C. BLAKE , District Judge . Plaintiff Jordan Brown has filed a motion for leave to conduct post-judgment discovery in aid of execution. In response, defendant Dr. Ramona Brockett has filed a motion to dismiss with prejudice and quash deposition. Brown's motion will be granted and defendant's motion will be denied. This case proceeded to trial on October 15, 2013, and this court entered an amended judgment for Brown against Brockett in the amount of $40,000. Costs were ..
More
MEMORANDUM
CATHERINE C. BLAKE, District Judge.
Plaintiff Jordan Brown has filed a motion for leave to conduct post-judgment discovery in aid of execution. In response, defendant Dr. Ramona Brockett has filed a motion to dismiss with prejudice and quash deposition.
Brown's motion will be granted and defendant's motion will be denied. This case proceeded to trial on October 15, 2013, and this court entered an amended judgment for Brown against Brockett in the amount of $40,000. Costs were taxed by the Clerk. The judgment was appealed and affirmed by the Fourth Circuit on November 4, 2014. Accordingly, Brockett's motion to dismiss is untimely. Moreover, although Brockett filed for bankruptcy in 2013, on May 7, 2015 the Bankruptcy Court denied defendant's discharge, stating that she had "committed [fraudulent] acts described in 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(2) and (a)(4)." [Ex. B, Pl.'s Resp. Opp'n Mot. Dismiss at 1, ECF No. 190-2.) Therefore, the judgment has not been discharged and Brown is entitled to pursue post-judgment discovery if he so chooses, notwithstanding Brockett's apparent disability.
A separate order follows.
Source: Leagle
