Opinion
Case No. 3:10-cv-718-J-32MCR.
August 24, 2011
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Deposition (Doc. 37), Motion to Depose Defendant's Counsel (Doc. 38), Motion to Strike Defendant's Request for Admissions (Doc. 39), and Motion to Strike Request for Production (Doc. 40) filed August 23, 2011.
Plaintiffs Motions fail to comply with the requirements of Rule 3.01(g), Local Rules, United States District Court, Middle District of Florida. The importance of the Local Rules cannot be overstated. All parties are expected to be familiar with and comply with all applicable rules of this Court. The purpose of Local Rule 3.01(g) "is to require the parties to communicate and resolve certain types of disputes without court intervention."Desai v. Tire Kingdom, Inc., 944 F. Supp. 876 (M.D. Fla. 1996). The term "communicate" has been further clarified to mean, "to speak to each other in person or by telephone, in a good faith attempt to resolve disputed issues." Davis v. Apfel, 2000 WL 1658575 (M.D. Fla. 2000).
The Court directs Plaintiff to confer with opposing counsel in a good faith attempt to resolve the issues presented and if the parties are unable to do so, Plaintiff may file renewed motions. Accordingly, after due consideration, it is
ORDERED:
Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Deposition (Doc. 37), Motion to Depose Defendant's Counsel (Doc. 38), Motion to Strike Defendant's Request for Admissions (Doc. 39), and Motion to Strike Request for Production (Doc. 40) are DENIED without prejudice. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Jacksonville, Florida.