Opinion
21-cv-03323-HSG (TSH)
02-28-2023
GINA GARRETT, Plaintiff, v. KYLA JOHNSON-TRAMMELL, et al., Defendants.
DISCOVERY ORDER RE DKT. NO. 125
THOMAS S. HIXSON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
In ECF No. 125, Defendant Kyla Johnson-Trammell moves to compel against Plaintiff Gina Garrett. The Court ordered Plaintiff to file a response by February 27, 2023 and stated that the failure to do so would be treated as a default. ECF No. 127. Plaintiff has not filed a response. Accordingly, the Court now rules on the motion to compel based only on the arguments presented by the moving party.
A. Interrogatories 10, 15, 16, 22-25
Plaintiff has answered interrogatory (“rog”) 10. It asks Plaintiff to state all facts in support of her allegation that Defendant created the position of Chief Services and Support Officer. In her response, Plaintiff quibbles with the name of the title, but then goes on to state that the position was created by Board Resolution and that Defendant, as superintendent, was by law the CEO of the Board. That is an answer to the question. It might not be a good answer or a correct answer, but it is an answer.
However, Plaintiff has not answered rogs 15, 16, and 22-25. In response to a “state all facts” rog, it's not good enough to say “see, for example,” this piece of evidence (rog 15), or “look to all evidence that has been submitted” (rog 16); that doesn't answer the question. And, given the allegations in the First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff can't get away with saying she doesn't know how to answer rogs 22 and 23. She has not answered rog 24, and her objections to rog 25 are frivolous.
B. Requests for Production
Defendant complains that Plaintiff has still not produced any documents at all, even though Judge Gilliam ordered her to do so at the February 16, 2023 hearing. ECF No. 120. Judge Gilliam's order to produce documents is already an order, and the undersigned will not issue a second order telling Plaintiff to comply with the first order. However, the Court agrees that Plaintiff should also be ordered to produce a privilege log for any documents withheld on a claim of privilege.
C. Conclusion
Defendant's motion to compel is granted in part and denied in part as stated above. The Court ORDERS Plaintiff to serve amended responses to rogs 15, 16, 22, 23, 24 and 25 and a privilege log no later than March 7, 2023.
IT IS SO ORDERED.