From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Emery v. Potter

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Mar 7, 2007
CIV-04-2992 PHX-JAT (D. Ariz. Mar. 7, 2007)

Opinion

CIV-04-2992 PHX-JAT.

March 7, 2007


ORDER


Pending before the Court is Defendant's Motion to Quash the Deposition of Martin Sanchez (Doc. #98). Defendant objects to the deposition because Plaintiff has not sought leave from the Court to take the deposition as required by Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 31(a)(2). Rule 31(a)(2) requires a party to obtain leave of court if it wants to take more than ten depositions on written questions. Plaintiff has taken twelve such depositions to date without obtaining leave from the Court.

The Court will grant the motion to quash for failure to obtain leave to take the thirteenth deposition. But, more importantly, the Court will grant the motion to quash because discovery in this case closed on January 27, 2007. In fact, the Defendant has filed a motion for summary judgment. The parties may have agreed to take certain depositions after the deadline for discovery, but the Court has never extended the discovery deadline.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED GRANTING Defendant's Motion to Quash the Deposition of Martin Sanchez (Doc. #98).


Summaries of

Emery v. Potter

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Mar 7, 2007
CIV-04-2992 PHX-JAT (D. Ariz. Mar. 7, 2007)
Case details for

Emery v. Potter

Case Details

Full title:Jessica R. Emery, Plaintiff, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United…

Court:United States District Court, D. Arizona

Date published: Mar 7, 2007

Citations

CIV-04-2992 PHX-JAT (D. Ariz. Mar. 7, 2007)

Citing Cases

Abell v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior

The Court rejects Defendant's argument on this point - not only was it raised for the first time in its reply…