From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Monroe v. Davis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Jan 30, 2014
2:13-cv-00863-GMN-NJK (D. Nev. Jan. 30, 2014)

Opinion

2:13-cv-00863-GMN-NJK

01-30-2014

MARSHALL MONROE, Plaintiff(s), v. GLORIA DEAN DAVIS, et al., Defendant(s).


ORDER

Before the Court is Defendants' Emergency Motion for Sanctions for Mr. Monroe's Failure to the [sic] Attend FRCP 35 Evaluation. Docket No. 21. The Court has reviewed Defendants' motion, Docket No. 21, Defendants' supplement to the motion, Docket No. 25, and Plaintiff's response, Docket No. 26. The Court finds this motion appropriately resolved without oral argument. Local Rule 78-2. For the reasons discussed below, Defendants' motion is hereby DENIED as moot.

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff was scheduled to attend a Rule 35 medical evaluation with board certified orthopaedic surgeon, Dr. Michael Elkanich, on January 23, 2014. Docket No. 21-1. Plaintiff failed to attend that examination. Docket No. 21, at 2. Thereafter, the parties agreed to reset Plaintiff's examination and extend the discovery deadline. Docket No. 24. On January 27, 2014, Defendants filed the instant motion seeking monetary sanctions for the "no show" charges charged by Dr. Elkanich's office as well as an order compelling Plaintiff to attend a rescheduled evaluation with Dr. Elkanich. Docket No. 21, at 3. Defendants also requested an extension to discovery deadlines. Id. On January 29, 2014, Plaintiff responded to Defendants motion indicating that Plaintiff has already agreed to attend a rescheduled evaluation, to extend discovery deadlines, and to pay the "no show" charges to Dr. Elkanich's office. Docket No. 26. Therefore, the Court finds that Defendants' motion is moot.

The Court granted the parties' stipulation for extension of deadlines on January 28, 2014, Docket No. 24.

The Court instructs the parties that moving forward, they must withdraw motions which request relief for disputes that no longer exist. Further, all motions to compel must satisfy the meet and confer requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(2)(B) and Local Rule 26-7(b).

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, and good cause appearing therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Emergency Motion for Sanctions for Mr. Monroe's Failure to the [sic] Attend FRCP 35 Evaluation (Docket No. 21) is DENIED as moot.

__________

NANCY J. KOPPE

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Monroe v. Davis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Jan 30, 2014
2:13-cv-00863-GMN-NJK (D. Nev. Jan. 30, 2014)
Case details for

Monroe v. Davis

Case Details

Full title:MARSHALL MONROE, Plaintiff(s), v. GLORIA DEAN DAVIS, et al., Defendant(s).

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Jan 30, 2014

Citations

2:13-cv-00863-GMN-NJK (D. Nev. Jan. 30, 2014)