Opinion
Civil Action No. 99-3456, Section "N" (2)
August 14, 2000
ORDER AND REASONS
Local Rule 7.5E of the Eastern District of Louisiana requires that memoranda in opposition to a motion be filed AND a copy be delivered to chambers eight days prior to the date set for hearing of the motion. No memorandum in opposition to defendant Coastal Oil Gas USA, L.P.'s Motions to Strike Plaintiff's Objections to Discovery Requests, to Compel Plaintiff's More Complete Responses to Discovery, to Deem Requests for Admissions Admitted, and for Sanctions and/or Attorney's Fees and Expenses, set for hearing on August 9, 2000 at 11:00 a.m. without oral argument, Record Doc. No. 21, has been timely submitted. Accordingly, this motion is deemed to be unopposed, and, further, it appearing to the Court that the motion has merit in part, IT IS ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows.
Plaintiff moved on August 8, 2000 to continue the hearing date on this motion and on Coastal's Motion for Sanctions and/or Attorney's Fees and Expenses, Record Doc. No. 20, which was also set for hearing on August 9, 2000 before the presiding district judge. The district judge denied plaintiff's motion to continue the hearings on both of defendant s motions. Record Doc. No. 22.
A. Procedural Background
Coastal served interrogatories, requests for production of documents and requests for admissions upon plaintiff, Sammy Ordoyne, on May 8, 2000. Plaintiff did not respond within 30 days as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and he neither requested nor received an extension of time from Coastal or the Court. He responded to the discovery requests on June 29, 2000. Defendant's Exhs. B, C, D.
B. Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Objections and to Deem All Requests for Admissions Admitted Because of Untimeliness
Coastal argues that plaintiff's objections to its interrogatories, requests for production of documents and requests for admissions should be stricken on the ground that the objections were untimely. The motion is GRANTED as to Coastal's interrogatories and requests for production. Generally, in the absence of an extension of time or good cause, the failure to file a written response in the time fixed by the rule constitutes a waiver of any objection. Fed.R.Civ.P. 33(b)(4); In Re United States, 864 F.2d 1153, 1156 (5th Cir. 1989); Coker v. Duke Co., 177 F.R.D. 682, 684 (M.D. Ala. 1998); Dunlap v. Midcoast-Little Rock. Inc., 166 F.R.D. 29, 30 (E.D. Ark. 1995);Godsey v. United States, 133 F.R.D. 111, 112 (S.D. Miss. 1990).
The motion is DENIED as to Coastal's request that plaintiff's objections to its requests for admissions be deemed waived as untimely or that its requests for admissions be deemed admitted for the same reason. Coastal had previously moved for summary judgment in its favor, arguing that plaintiff's failure to respond to its requests for admissions meant that the requests were deemed admitted. Ordoyne then provided responses to those requests and filed an opposition to defendant's motion for summary judgment. Order and Reasons dated July 11, 2000, Record Doc. No. 17, at 2.
In denying summary judgment, the presiding district judge held that plaintiff's failure to timely respond to the requests for admissions meant that the requests were deemed admitted. Id. at 3. However, the district judge construed plaintiff's opposition memorandum as a motion to withdraw those admissions. Id. She granted that motion and specifically permitted Ordoyne to substitute his June 29th responses for the previous admissions.Id. at 3-4. Therefore, Ordoyne's responses to Coastal's requests for admissions are deemed to be timely.
C. Motion to Compel More Complete Responses to Interrogatories
This portion of defendant's motion is GRANTED. As stated above, plaintiff's objections to Interrogatory Nos. 13-19 have been waived. In addition, his answer to Interrogatory No. 13 is nonresponsive.
Further, the copies of plaintiff's answers to interrogatories provided to me in connection with these motions do not include the verification required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 33(b). If plaintiff has not yet provided it, he must provide defendant with the sworn verification, signed under oath by plaintiff himself, not by his counsel of record, in full compliance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 33 (b)(1) and (2), of his original and his supplemental answers to interrogatories.
D. Motion to Compel More Complete Responses to Requests for Production
Defendant's motion is DENIED as to Request for Production No. 11, with the exception that plaintiff's objection has been waived as stated above. Ordoyne's response that no statements have been taken is sufficient.
The motion is GRANTED as to Request for Production Nos. 23, 24, 25, 26 and 27. Although plaintiff's responses that he has no documents responsive to these requests at this time is sufficient, he must amend his written responses and produce responsive documents "seasonably" after he has acquired such documents. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(e).
E. Motion to Deem Certain Requests for Admissions Admitted
Coastal asks the Court to overrule plaintiff's objections and deem certain requests for admissions admitted or to order plaintiff to respond non-evasively. Rule 37(a) provides that a party's
answer shall specifically deny the matter or set forth in detail the reasons why the answering party cannot truthfully admit or deny the matter. A denial shall fairly meet the substance of the requested admission, and when good faith requires that a party qualify an answer or deny only a part of the matter of which an admission is requested, the party shall specify so much of it as is true and qualify or deny the remainder. An answering party may not give lack of information or knowledge as a reason for failure to admit or deny unless the party states that the party has made reasonable inquiry and that the information known or readily obtainable by the party is insufficient to enable the party to admit or deny.
Pursuant to this rule, Coastal's motion is GRANTED IN PART as to Requests for Admission No. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8. Ordoyne's objections are overruled and he is ordered to admit or deny the requests as phrased. He may qualify his answers in good faith if necessary.
The motion is GRANTED IN PART as to Requests for Admission No. 16 and 17. Plaintiff must make reasonable inquiry, if he has not already done so, and must amend his responses either to specifically admit or deny these requests, or to state that he has made reasonable inquiry and that the information known or readily obtainable by him is insufficient to enable him to admit or deny.
The motion is GRANTED IN PART as to Requests for Admission No. 25, 25(2), and 26. Plaintiff's objections are overruled. He must admit or deny the statements as phrased. He may qualify his answers m good faith to define his understanding of the boarding equipment about which he is responding.
Ordoyne's objections that Requests for Admission No. 24, 27-36, and 38-40 call for conclusions of law are also overruled and Coastal's motion is GRANTED as to these requests. Plaintiff must admit or deny the statements as phrased, but he may qualify his answers in good faith if necessary.
F. Motion for Sanctions and/or Attorney's Fees and Expenses
Coastal's motion for sanctions and/or attorney's fees and expenses is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff is ORDERED to pay to defendant $300.00 in attorney's fees under Fed.R.Civ.P. 37 (a)(4) for his failure to respond to discovery served on May 8, 2000. Because defendant's motion to compel has been granted in part and denied in part, no additional sanctions are warranted.Id.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, Ordoyne is HEREBY ORDERED to provide complete, written, supplemental responses to defendant's Interrogatory Nos. 13-19; Request for Production Nos. 23, 24, 25, 26 and 27; and Requests for Admission No. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 16, 17, 24, 25, 25 (2), 26, 27-36 and 38-40, in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 33, 34 and 36, within ten (10) days of entry of this order.