Free Order on Motion to Compel - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

__ ._____%d______________m______u________________t_l_.l.......__.L..l.._l._......._.._1
F`| d O4/05/2005 Q f 6] J
‘ * Case 3:03-cv—OO299—DFM Document 43 ne Q Q (U_fg(
i 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURf3wwl_§;§3
T i T DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT ' `
Mjjgli __5 ii;) {Jil
1 M
i , ALEX vstsz ; = ¤;;g_y;`g‘e;i=(;i1` SUNW
r 1 ; PRÂ¥%$>9NU3-RTJRD CI
Q v. : Case No. 3:O3CV299(RNC)(DFM)
` JENSEN, er ai. Q
l
1 i RULING AND ORDER
i 1 Plaintiff has filed a motion to compel defendants to provide
information included in his “first request for interrogatories”
i and his “first request for production of documents.” In i
response, defendants state that plaintiff has made no good faith i
1 !
K effort to resolve this dispute and indicate that the requests, `
I
I seeking the production of thousands of documents, are overly 1
y broad and burdensome. For the reasons that follow, plaintiff’s g
i motion is denied. i
Rule 37, D. Conn. L. Civ. R., provides in relevant part: l
i No motion pursuant to Rules 26 through 37, 1
Fed. R. Civ. P., shall be filed unless
counsel making the motion has conferred with
opposing counsel and discussed the discovery
issues between them in detail in a good faith .
effort to eliminate or reduce the area of
controversy, and to arrive at a mutually I
satisfactory resolution. Q
1
The purpose of this rule is to encourage the parties to make a
good faith effort to resolve the dispute without the intervention
i
of the court. See Getschmann v. James River Paper Co., Inc.,
Civil 5:92cvl63 (WWE), slip op. at 2 (D. Conn. January 14, 1993)
(court should not “become unnecessarily involved in disputes that
K


‘ I Case 3:03-cv—OO299-DFM Document 43 Filed O4/05/2005 Page20f2
i .
D can and should be resolved by the parties"). In addition, Rule
W 37(a)3 requires that any discovery motion be accompanied by a
` memorandum of law “contain[ing] a concise statement of the nature
l
# of the case and a specific verbatim listing of each of the items
{ of discovery sought or opposed, and immediately following each
I specification shall set forth the reason why the item should be
i allowed or disallowed.” Copies of the discovery requests must be 2
included as exhibits. i
Plaintiff does not indicate in his motion that he has _ i
contacted defendants’ attorney and made a good faith effort to W
resolve these matters and defendants indicate that he has not E
l
done so. In addition, plaintiff has not attached copies of his i
discovery requests or submitted a memorandum indicating the Q
relevance of each disputed item as required by Rule 37(a)3. E
Plaintiff’s general statement that the information is relevant to W
his case is insufficient to satisfy this requirement. Thus, the {
motion to compel [doc. #40] is DENIED without prejudice. A
If plaintiff decides to file another motion to compel, he is {
advised, first, to confer with defendants’ counsel and attempt to g
narrow his requests and, second, to comply with the requirements I
of Rule 37(a)3 regarding the form of his motion.
SO ORDERED this 5m day of AprEy{i2005, at_ artford,
Connecticut. / / /iL]}H
_ V _, N i
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE I
E i
ir., .......i......_.--...—..._»......_%»».. E