From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wright v. Bullock

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
Oct 12, 2011
Case No. 09-1085 (C.D. Ill. Oct. 12, 2011)

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


Summaries of

Wright v. Bullock

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
Oct 12, 2011
Case No. 09-1085 (C.D. Ill. Oct. 12, 2011)
Case details for

Wright v. Bullock

Case Details

Full title:Margaret Wright, Plaintiff v. Mary Ellen Bullock, et al, Defendants

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Date published: Oct 12, 2011

Citations

Case No. 09-1085 (C.D. Ill. Oct. 12, 2011)