Canyon Partners Real Estate LLC v. Newbanks/Washington Construction Consulting Services, Inc., 17-12852. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan
Number: infdco20180913h17
Visitors: 2
Filed: Sep. 11, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 11, 2018
Summary: ORDER R. STEVEN WHALEN , Magistrate Judge . For the reasons and under the terms stated on the record on September 11, 2018, Defendant's Motion to Compel [Doc. #24] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. With respect to all discovery that is the subject of this motion, with the exception of Interrogatory No. 2 and Interrogatory No. 3, the motion is GRANTED, and Plaintiff will produce responses within 30 days of the date of this Order. If a response is to be determined with reference to the
Summary: ORDER R. STEVEN WHALEN , Magistrate Judge . For the reasons and under the terms stated on the record on September 11, 2018, Defendant's Motion to Compel [Doc. #24] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. With respect to all discovery that is the subject of this motion, with the exception of Interrogatory No. 2 and Interrogatory No. 3, the motion is GRANTED, and Plaintiff will produce responses within 30 days of the date of this Order. If a response is to be determined with reference to the P..
More
ORDER
R. STEVEN WHALEN, Magistrate Judge.
For the reasons and under the terms stated on the record on September 11, 2018, Defendant's Motion to Compel [Doc. #24] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.
With respect to all discovery that is the subject of this motion, with the exception of Interrogatory No. 2 and Interrogatory No. 3, the motion is GRANTED, and Plaintiff will produce responses within 30 days of the date of this Order. If a response is to be determined with reference to the Plaintiff's documents, Plaintiff must "specify[] the records that must be reviewed, in sufficient detail to enable the interrogating party to locate and identify them as readily as the responding party could." Fed.R.Civ.P. 33(d)(1). Specifically, the Plaintiff will specify the records that are responsive to each request with Bates numbers. Plaintiff will in a like manner specify the documents that have already been produced in response to Defendant's discovery requests.
The Plaintiff will produce a privilege log as to any documents to which it is claiming privilege.
Defendant's request to compel responses to Interrogatory No. 2 and Interrogatory No. 3 is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle