Opinion
Case No. 16-CV-488-JED-FHM
09-08-2017
LUKE STEWART, et al., Plaintiffs, v. BROTHERHOOD MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant's Amended Motion to Quash Plaintiffs' Notice of Video-Recorded Deposition Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6), [Dkt. 65], is pending. The briefing cycle has not been completed. However, in the 30(b)(6) deposition Plaintiffs seek testimony about the content selection for the website and the preparation and distribution of safety related and church liability related information to insureds, which is essentially the information sought in Interrogatories Nos. 11, 12, and 13 which the court has addressed in a previous order, finding that such information is not relevant. [Dkt. 72]. That finding applies equally to the proposed 30(b)(6) deposition, rendering that issue moot which results in effectively granting Defendant's motion to quash.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs' Notice of Video-Recorded Deposition Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6), is QUASHED. Defendant's Amended Motion to Quash Plaintiffs' Notice of Video-Recorded Deposition Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6), [Dkt. 65], is GRANTED.
SO ORDERED this 8th day of September, 2017.
/s/ _________
FRANK H. McCARTHY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE