Barefield v. R.D. Motors, Inc.

Full title: JOHN BAREFIELD, Plaintiff, v. R.D. MOTORS, INC., Defendant

Court: United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: Jan 31, 2008

Civil Action No. 07-cv-00333-WDM-BNB (D. Colo. Jan. 31, 2008)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 07-cv-00333-WDM-BNB.

January 31, 2008

ORDER

BOYD BOLAND, Magistrate Judge

This matter is before me on the following:

(1) Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Comply With the Court's Order of October 29, 2007 and Compel Plaintiff to Respond to Defendant's Second Set of Requests for Production of Documents [Doc. # 37, filed 1/8/2008] (the "Motion to Compel");

(2) Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order [Doc. # 40, filed 1/11/2008] (the "Motion for Protective Order"); and

(3) Motion for Permission to File a Reply In Support of Defendant's Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Comply With the Court's Order of October 29, 2007 and Compel Plaintiff to Respond to Defendant's Second Set of Requests for Production of Documents Dkt. No. 37) [Doc. # 49, filed 1/28/2008] (the "Motion to File Reply").

I held a hearing on the motions on January 30, 2007, and made rulings on the record, which are incorporated here. In summary and for the reasons stated on the record:

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Compel is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:

GRANTED to require the plaintiff to supplement his responses to Interrogatories No. 3 and 4 concerning his employment and self-employment to the current date, including any omitted places of employment during 2003-2004 and, if applicable, any employment with Coors and/or Resource Management; and to require the plaintiff to supplement his responses to Production Requests No. 7 and 8 concerning employment applications and to execute employment releases for any employers for which no such release has been provided;

GRANTED to require the plaintiff to supplement his response to Interrogatory No. 11 concerning criminal and civil cases, administrative proceedings, and judicial proceedings to which the plaintiff is or has been a party since January 1, 2003; and to require the plaintiff to supplement his response to Production Request No. 11; and

DENIED in all other respects.

The plaintiff shall serve supplemental discovery responses consistent with this order on or before February 13, 2008.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Protective Order is DENIED. The deposition of Lance Kennoy shall be taken, if at all, at a date and time as the parties may agree but no later than February 29, 2008.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to File Reply is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to accept for filing Defendant's Reply In Support of Its Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Comply With the Court's Order of October 29, 2007 and Compel Plaintiff to Respond to Defendant's Second Set of Requests for Production of Documents [Doc. # 47].