From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shapiro v. Laxman

United States District Court, E.D. New York
Mar 30, 2007
CV 06-5865 (ADS) (ARL) (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2007)

Opinion

CV 06-5865 (ADS) (ARL).

March 30, 2007


ORDER


By letter motion dated March 22, 2007, plaintiffs seek to compel responses to their interrogatories and requests to produce that were served on December 12, 2006. Defendants oppose the application by letter dated March 27, 2007. According to the defendants, the plaintiffs have not attempted to resolve these issues by first conferring with the defendants in good faith. Plaintiffs do not contend otherwise. Accordingly, the application is denied with leave to renew. The parties are directed to meet and confer in good faith in an effort to resolve these issues. The court interprets good faith to be in person contact either by telephone or in person. See Individual Practices of Magistrate Judge Arlene Lindsay, Rule 2(A)(1).

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Shapiro v. Laxman

United States District Court, E.D. New York
Mar 30, 2007
CV 06-5865 (ADS) (ARL) (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2007)
Case details for

Shapiro v. Laxman

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD SHAPIRO, P.C., et al., Plaintiffs, v. SHREENATH LAXMAN, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. New York

Date published: Mar 30, 2007

Citations

CV 06-5865 (ADS) (ARL) (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2007)