From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Richardson v. DSPP, Inc.

United States District Court, Middle District of Florida
Sep 14, 2021
3:21-cv-172-TJC-PDB (M.D. Fla. Sep. 14, 2021)

Opinion

3:21-cv-172-TJC-PDB

09-14-2021

Ricky Richardson, Plaintiff, v. DSPP, Inc., etc., Defendants.


ORDER

Patricia D. Barksdale, United States Magistrate Judge

Ricky Richardson moves to compel DSPP, Inc., to respond to his requests for production and answer his interrogatories. Doc. 19. He also requests attorney's fees. Doc. 19. He states his counsel spoke with someone at DSPP's counsel's office, who stated counsel was unavailable. Doc. 19 at 4. Richardson's counsel explained DSPP had to respond to Richardson's discovery requests before the deposition of DSPP's corporate representative. Doc. 19 at 4. DSPP failed to respond, and Richardson had to cancel the deposition. Doc. 19 at 4. Counsel apparently have not conferred on the motion.

Local Rule 3.01(g)(3) provides:

If the opposing party is unavailable before the motion's filing, the movant after filing must try diligently for three days to contact the opposing party. Promptly after either contact or expiration of the three days, the movant must supplement the motion with a statement certifying whether the parties have resolved all or part of the motion. Failure to timely supplement can result in denial of the motion without prejudice.

The three-day period has expired, and Richardson has not supplemented the motion. The motion is denied without prejudice.

Ordered.


Summaries of

Richardson v. DSPP, Inc.

United States District Court, Middle District of Florida
Sep 14, 2021
3:21-cv-172-TJC-PDB (M.D. Fla. Sep. 14, 2021)
Case details for

Richardson v. DSPP, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Ricky Richardson, Plaintiff, v. DSPP, Inc., etc., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Middle District of Florida

Date published: Sep 14, 2021

Citations

3:21-cv-172-TJC-PDB (M.D. Fla. Sep. 14, 2021)