Filed: Mar. 06, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 06, 2019
Summary: ORDER STEVEN E. RAU , Magistrate Judge . Defendant Russell served interrogatories and document requests on Plaintiff Heiderscheid on November 16, 2018. (Amended Aff. of Jeffrey A. Timmerman 2, ECF No. 29). Heiderscheid did not respond. (Timmerman Aff. 5). On January 22, 2019, Russell, through counsel, sent Heiderscheid a letter seeking the past-due discovery responses. (Timmerman Aff. 6). Heiderscheid has yet to respond to Russell's discovery requests. (Timmerman Aff. 7). Russel mo
Summary: ORDER STEVEN E. RAU , Magistrate Judge . Defendant Russell served interrogatories and document requests on Plaintiff Heiderscheid on November 16, 2018. (Amended Aff. of Jeffrey A. Timmerman 2, ECF No. 29). Heiderscheid did not respond. (Timmerman Aff. 5). On January 22, 2019, Russell, through counsel, sent Heiderscheid a letter seeking the past-due discovery responses. (Timmerman Aff. 6). Heiderscheid has yet to respond to Russell's discovery requests. (Timmerman Aff. 7). Russel mov..
More
ORDER
STEVEN E. RAU, Magistrate Judge.
Defendant Russell served interrogatories and document requests on Plaintiff Heiderscheid on November 16, 2018. (Amended Aff. of Jeffrey A. Timmerman ¶ 2, ECF No. 29). Heiderscheid did not respond. (Timmerman Aff. ¶ 5). On January 22, 2019, Russell, through counsel, sent Heiderscheid a letter seeking the past-due discovery responses. (Timmerman Aff. ¶ 6). Heiderscheid has yet to respond to Russell's discovery requests. (Timmerman Aff. ¶ 7).
Russel moved to compel discovery. (ECF No. 20). The Court held a hearing on March 6, 2019. (ECF No. 31). Heiderscheid did not appear. (See ECF No. 31). At the hearing, the Court was informed Heiderscheid recently failed to appear for a motion hearing in a separate case involving Dakota County officials. (See Case No. 18-cv-2677 (PJS/DTS), ECF No. 36).1
"`[A] plaintiff has affirmative obligations as a litigant,' and one of those obligations is to participate in discovery . . ." Nelson v. Williams, Case No. 13-cv-181 (PJS/LIB), 2013 WL 12303366, at *3 (D. Minn. Oct. 18, 2013) (quoting Brennan v. Qwest Commc'n Int'l, Inc., Case No. 07-cv-2024 (ADM/JSM), 2009 WL 1586721, at *9 (D. Minn. June 4, 2009)). Heiderscheid failed to respond to Russell's discovery requests. Further, Heiderscheid failed to appear at the hearing on Russell's motion to compel. Heiderscheid cannot ignore his obligations as a litigant. The Court grants Russell's motion. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(3)(B)(iii)-(iv) (permitting a party to move to compel where a party fails to answer interrogatories or produce documents).
Therefore, based on the files, record, and proceeding herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Cartier Russell's Motion to Compel Discovery, (ECF No. 20), is GRANTED as follows:
1. Plaintiff Heiderscheid shall fully respond to Defendant Deputy Cartier Russell's Interrogatories to Plaintiff (Set One) within 30 days of this Order.
2. Plaintiff Heiderscheid shall fully respond to Defendant Deputy Cartier Russell's Requests to Plaintiff for Production of Documents and Things (Set One) within 30 days of this Order.
3. Failure to comply with this Order may result in sanctions, up to and including dismissal of this action with prejudice. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A). Should Plaintiff Heiderscheid fail to comply with this Order, Defendant Russell may move to dismiss this action as a discovery sanction, for failure to comply with court orders, and for failure to prosecute.
