From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Spickler v. Dominick

STATE OF MAINE Sagadahoc SUPERIOR COURT
Mar 6, 2012
Docket No. BATSC-RE-11-027 (Me. Mar. 6, 2012)

Opinion

Docket No. BATSC-RE-11-027

03-06-2012

ROBERT SPICKLER Plaintiff v. OLIVER DOMINICK Defendant


ORDER

This civil action came before the court for a discovery conference. Plaintiff Robert Spickler participated pro se. Defendant Oliver Dominick was absent but appeared through his attorney, Frederick Moore, Esq.

There was discussion about pending discovery and scheduling depositions. The court requested, and the parties agreed, that the parties will cooperate in scheduling depositions and in conducting other discovery.

On February 24, 2012, Mr. Spickler filed a Motion Seeking Equal Treatment During Court Procedures. The court advised him that such a motion was unnecessary because he had the same right to fair and equal treatment as any other party, but indicated that the motion would be granted because to deny it might imply otherwise. Defendant did not object.

Also, the court raised the question whether this case and another civil action in this court, Parker Head Association v. Spickler, Docket No. BATSC-CV-11-13, should be consolidated or at least scheduled together. The parties agreed to discuss that question. Mr. Spickler advised that he intends to ask attorney David Hirshon, who represents Mr. Spickler in the other case, to enter an appearance in this case as well.

As a result of the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:

1. Defendant's Motion for Protection is dismissed because it was filed without prior authorization under M.R. Civ. P. 26(g)(1).
2. Plaintiff's Motion Seeking Equal Treatment During Court Procedures is granted.
3. The parties will cooperate in scheduling depositions and in other forms of discovery as well. With regard to Plaintiff's request to take the deposition of the Defendant, Defendant's counsel will provide Plaintiff forthwith with at least five dates on which Defendant and his
counsel are available, and Plaintiff will forthwith either notify the Defendant's attorney which of those dates Plaintiff is selecting for Defendant's deposition or, if the Plaintiff is not available on any of the proffered dates, request another five dates. This process will continue until a mutually agreeable date for Defendant's deposition to be taken is established.

Pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 79(a), the clerk is hereby directed to incorporate this order by reference in the docket.

______________

A. M. Horton

Justice, Superior Court

ROBERT D SPICKLER

- PLAINTIFF

SUPERIOR COURT

25 ROCK LEDGE DRIVE

SAGADAHOC, ss.

Docket No BATSC-RE-2011-00027

PHIPPSBURG ME 045G2

VS

OLIVER DOMINICK

- DEFENDANT

DOCKET RECORD

13 2 CAPTAIN JOHN PARKER RD

PHIPPSBURG ME 04 56 2

Attorney for: OLIVER DOMINICK

FREDERICK MOORE - LIMITED

SCHULTE & MOORE

511 CONGRESS STREET

SUITE 8 05

PORTLAND ME 04101

Filing Document: COMPLAINT Minor Case Type: OTHER REAL ESTATE

Filing Date: 10/17/2011


Summaries of

Spickler v. Dominick

STATE OF MAINE Sagadahoc SUPERIOR COURT
Mar 6, 2012
Docket No. BATSC-RE-11-027 (Me. Mar. 6, 2012)
Case details for

Spickler v. Dominick

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT SPICKLER Plaintiff v. OLIVER DOMINICK Defendant

Court:STATE OF MAINE Sagadahoc SUPERIOR COURT

Date published: Mar 6, 2012

Citations

Docket No. BATSC-RE-11-027 (Me. Mar. 6, 2012)