Opinion
5:23-cv-441-GAP-PRL
01-02-2024
ORDER
PHILIP R. LAMMENS, United States Magistrate Judge
By Order dated December 18, 2023, the District Judge set a two-day jury trial on the issue of whether an arbitration agreement exists. (Doc. 43). Because the Court found disputed issues regarding formation of the arbitration agreements, the Court granted Plaintiff's motion to conduct limited arbitration-related discovery and directed the parties “to conduct the limited discovery outlined in Plaintiff's motion” by February 15, 2024. (Doc. 43).
Now, Defendants have filed a motion seeking leave to engage in limited discovery in advance of the two-day jury trial. (Do. 44). Specifically, Defendants seek to serve interrogatories and requests for production, as well as depose Plaintiff, Dixie Palesch, and anyone else Plaintiff identifies as being relevant to her decisionmaking and/or understanding of the arbitration agreements, including but not limited to the unnamed individual Plaintiff alleges informed her “she did not have to sign the Signature Required Arbitration Agreement, but merely had to acknowledge she had received it.” Defendants represent that Plaintiff has no objection to this requested discovery.
Upon due consideration, Defendants' motion (Doc. 44) is GRANTED and Defendants may conduct the limited discovery outlined in their motion by February 15, 2024.
DONE and ORDERED.