From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jefferson v. Crooks

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Jonesboro Division
Oct 3, 2007
3:06CV00158-WRW (E.D. Ark. Oct. 3, 2007)

Opinion

3:06CV00158-WRW.

October 3, 2007


ORDER


Pending are separate Defendant Geico Insurance's ("Geico") Motions to Compel Plaintiff's Rule 26 Initial Disclosures, and Answers to Interrogatories and Request for Production. Plaintiff has not respond to these motions.

Doc. No. 28.

Doc. No. 31.

Initial disclosures were due on April 27, 2007, and Geico served its first set of interrogatories and requests for production on May 3, 2007. The record reflects that Plaintiff has not complied with my initial scheduling order, has not answered discovery, and did not respond to this motion.

Doc. No. 14.

A party that does not object to interrogatories and requests for production within thirty days from service waives the right to object.

Fed.R.Civ.P. 33(b)(3) (stating that any objection not made timely objection waived); See Knowlton v. Teltrust Phones, Inc. 189 F.3d 1177, 1181 (10 Cir. 1999) (finding that objections to interrogatories and requests for production were waived by a late response).

For good cause shown, Geico's Motions (Doc. Nos. 28, 31) are GRANTED. Plaintiff has waived objections and must provide complete answers to separate Defendant by Monday, October 22, 2007. Plaintiff must also provide Rule 26 disclosures by the same date. Failure to comply with this order may result in additional sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Jefferson v. Crooks

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Jonesboro Division
Oct 3, 2007
3:06CV00158-WRW (E.D. Ark. Oct. 3, 2007)
Case details for

Jefferson v. Crooks

Case Details

Full title:KAYLA L. JEFFERSON PLAINTIFF v. GRAHAM L. CROOKS; HERTZ RENTAL CAR LLC…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Jonesboro Division

Date published: Oct 3, 2007

Citations

3:06CV00158-WRW (E.D. Ark. Oct. 3, 2007)