Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gil v. Tsolis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK


October 29, 2010

CARLOS GIL, PLAINTIFF,
v.
DEMITRIOS TSOLIS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Roanne L. Mann United States Magistrate Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

ROANNE L. MANN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The Court is in receipt of plaintiff's request for an order compelling defendants to "properly respond" to plaintiff's document requests and interrogatories. See Motion to Compel (Oct. 29, 2010), ECF Docket Entry ("D.E.") #8. The motion is deficient in several respects. First, nothing in the application indicates that plaintiff's counsel attempted to resolve these issues informally with defense counsel, as he was required to do before seeking judicial intervention. Secondly, the motion is unsupported by any legal analysis or authority.

Nevertheless, in view of plaintiff's clear entitlement to certain information, and the need for that information to be disclosed prior to the upcoming settlement conference, the Court rules as follows: Defendanst shall, by November 3, 2010, serve plaintiff with copies of the pay receipts that they agreed to produce in response to Document Request Number 1; and defendants shall, by November 2, 2010, provide information that is fully responsive to Interrogatory Numbers 3 and 4. The Court will not tolerate evasive answers.

Plaintiff's request for a compulsion order regarding Document Request Numbers 2, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 18 are denied without prejudice, for the two reasons noted above.

Column 1

SO ORDERED.

20101029

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.