Opinion
Case No. 07-11158.
April 1, 2008
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' OBJECTION TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE KOMIVES' ORDER TO GRANT IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
Defendants bring before this Court their objection to Magistrate Judge Komives' Order to Grant in Part Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery, issued October 11, 2007. Specifically, Defendants complain that the Magistrate's order allows Plaintiff to collect information that is typical of post judgment discovery and object to answering Requests 21 through 40 of Plaintiff's First Request for Production of Documents because they are overbroad and burdensome.
Although there are similarities between Plaintiff's requests and post-judgment collection requests, I agree with Magistrate Judge Komives' reasoning that this instance involves Plaintiff's attempt to prove Defendants' liability regarding the consent judgment. However, Magistrate Judge Komives also acknowledged in his October 11 order that the many of the requests, specifically 21-40, are overbroad and burdensome. The order states that "to the extent defendants' objections to these requests are based upon their breadth, burdensomeness, or relevance, Plaintiff is requested to rephrase these requests . . . to be more limited in time and take into account Defendants' objections regarding the breadth of their requests."
This Court ordered into effect a consent judgment between the parties on June 8, 2007.
The Court is unaware of any attempt by Plaintiff to revise these requests. Therefore, the Court GRANTS Defendants' objection to the order. As such, Plaintiff has until April 18, 2008 to comply with Magistrate Judge Komives' order and submit revised requests to Defendants. After which, a revised scheduling order will be issued.
SO ORDERED.