Opinion
Case No. 3:06-cv-585-J-20MCR.
March 10, 2008
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant, Core Carriers Inc.'s Motion for Sanctions (Doc. 40) filed February 22, 2008. Plaintiff, Reliance Insurance Company, filed a response in opposition on March 7, 2008 (Doc. 44). Accordingly, the matter is now ripe for judicial review.
Defendant seeks sanctions against Plaintiff as a result of Plaintiff's failure to make Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures and failure to respond to Defendant's request for production of documents. Defendant never filed a motion to compel but instead, waited until shortly before the trial term of April 7, 2008, in which to file a motion for sanctions. Defendant seeks an Order prohibiting Plaintiff from introducing "any documentary evidence apart from the exhibits to [Plaintiff's] amended complaint and prohibiting [Plaintiff] from calling any witness at the trial in this cause." (Doc. 40, p. 7). Plaintiff responds that the motion for sanctions is now moot because Judge Schlesinger recently extended the deadline for discovery to May 30, 2008 and also continued the trial until the trial term commencing on October 6, 2008. (Doc. 43). As such, Plaintiff argues there is no harm in its failure to provide discovery.
The Court looks disfavorably on a party's failure to provide discovery. While the Court does not condone Plaintiff's behavior, it is hesitant to impose the harsh sanction suggested by Defendant. Had Defendant filed motions to compel first and Plaintiff failed to comply with any orders issued as a result, the Court would be more receptive to limiting the evidence and witnesses Plaintiff could present at trial. However, Defendant made a tactical decision to wait to seek a sanction. As such, Defendant is partly to blame for the delay in addressing Plaintiff's behavior and the Court will not grant the sanctions requested by Defendant at this time. Instead, the Court will not require Defendant to file a motion to compel and will direct Plaintiff to provide Defendant with its Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures and its response to Defendant's production of documents no later than Friday, March 21, 2008. Plaintiff is warned that any further failure to provide discovery will be dealt with harshly by the Court.
Accordingly, after due consideration, it is
ORDERED:
Defendant's Motion for Sanctions (Doc. 40) is DENIED without prejudice.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Jacksonville, Florida.