Opinion
Case No. 09-1085
10-12-2011
Margaret Wright, Plaintiff v. Mary Ellen Bullock, et al, Defendants
ORDER
In an Order entered on Sept. 29, 2011, this Court deferred ruling on Plaintiff's motion to compel (#113) DCFS to produce certain documents. At a hearing, the Court was able to narrow down the dispute, as follows. The documents being sought were the "contextual" documents that might explain or provide context to a one-page document (Exh. 135) that had been produced during discovery. Because the motion to compel had not adequately directed attention to this particular exhibit, DCFS was allowed to supplement its response to the motion after it investigated Exhibit 135.
The supplement has now been filed. DCFS states that Exhibit 135 was part of two other exhibits that had been previously produced during discovery. In an abundance of caution, DCFS states that it re-produced these two documents to the Plaintiff.
The motion to compel is accordingly DENIED.
JOHN A. GORMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE