Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

STEPHENS v. SMITH, 4:13-CV-1644-JAR. (2014)

Court: District Court, E.D. Missouri Number: infdco20140703d78 Visitors: 4
Filed: Jul. 02, 2014
Latest Update: Jul. 02, 2014
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JOHN A. ROSS, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on Defendant's Motion for Protective Order and Extension of Discovery Deadline. (Doc. No. 9) The motion arises from efforts to schedule and complete depositions of the parties within the August 1, 2014 discovery deadline. The motion is fully briefed and ready for disposition. Defendant states he is available for deposition on any Thursday after July 31, 2014, and proposes the discovery deadline be extended unt
More

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

JOHN A. ROSS, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on Defendant's Motion for Protective Order and Extension of Discovery Deadline. (Doc. No. 9) The motion arises from efforts to schedule and complete depositions of the parties within the August 1, 2014 discovery deadline. The motion is fully briefed and ready for disposition.

Defendant states he is available for deposition on any Thursday after July 31, 2014, and proposes the discovery deadline be extended until August 17, 2014. In addition, Defendant moves this Court for a protective order from a deposition notice for July 1, 2014 served by Plaintiff. Plaintiff requests the Court order Defendant to submit to a deposition on Thursday, August 9, 2014, and that the discovery deadline be extended until Friday, August 28, 2014, to allow him to conduct discovery based on any information discovered during Defendant's deposition. Upon consideration, Defendant's motion will be granted in part and denied in part.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Protective Order and Extension of Discovery Deadline [9] is GRANTED in part.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the deadline for completion of all discovery is extended from August 1, 2014 to August 28, 2014. Except as amended herein, the Case Management Order issued November 8, 2013 (Doc. No. 6) will remain unchanged. The Court declines to order the Defendant to submit for a deposition on any particular date and expects that counsel will cooperate with each other to complete the remaining depositions in a timely manner.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's motion for protective order is DENIED as moot.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer