From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hildenbrand v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Sep 19, 2011
Civil Action No. 11-cv-00279-DME-KLM (D. Colo. Sep. 19, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11-cv-00279-DME-KLM

09-19-2011

SHERA HILDENBRAND, Plaintiff, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.


MINUTE ORDER

ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX

This matter is before the Court on Defendant's Motion for Protective Order [Docket No. 18; Filed September 14, 2011] (the "Motion"). The Motion does not comply with the Court's procedures for resolving discovery disputes. Specifically, the Order Setting Scheduling/Planning Conference provides as follows:

No opposed discovery motions are to be filed with the Court until the parties comply with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1A. If the parties are unable to reach agreement on a discovery issue after conferring, they shall arrange a conference call with Magistrate Judge Mix to attempt to resolve the issue. Both of these steps must be completed before any contested discovery motions are filed with the Court.
Order [#8] at 2 (emphasis added); see also Scheduling Order [#13] at 12.

Defendant arranged a conference call with Plaintiff, and the parties contacted Chambers on September 14, 2011. The subject of the Motion at hand, a Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6) deposition, was scheduled for the following day, September 15, 2011. The Court was unavailable to hear the discovery dispute until September 19, 2011. Although Defendant states it was "forced" to file the Motion due to the Court's unavailability, the Court is not persuaded by this reason for Defendant's noncompliance with the Court's discovery procedures. The Rule 30(b)(6) deposition was noticed on August 30, 2011, leaving ample time for the parties to contact the Court after conferral, as opposed to the last-minute contact initiated by Defendant.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED without prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that neither party shall file a contested discovery motion until after (1) conferring with the other party pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1A., and (2) contacting the Court to resolve the dispute. Unless a party receives leave from the Court to file an opposed discovery motion, any such motion will be denied. To either conduct or schedule a hearing regarding a discovery dispute, the parties shall initiate a conference call and then, once all parties are on the line, dial the Court at 303-335-2770.


Summaries of

Hildenbrand v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Sep 19, 2011
Civil Action No. 11-cv-00279-DME-KLM (D. Colo. Sep. 19, 2011)
Case details for

Hildenbrand v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:SHERA HILDENBRAND, Plaintiff, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Sep 19, 2011

Citations

Civil Action No. 11-cv-00279-DME-KLM (D. Colo. Sep. 19, 2011)