Matches in SCALES for { <scales/DocketEntry/ilnd;;1:08-cv-03025_de383> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 4 of
4
with 100 items per page.
- ilnd;;1:08-cv-03025_de383 RegisterActionDate "2014-09-19" @default.
- ilnd;;1:08-cv-03025_de383 RegisterActionDescriptionText "MINUTE entry before the Honorable Young B. Kim: Plaintiff's motion to compel the City of Chicago to comply with subpoena 376 is granted in part and denied in part. The motion stems from a subpoena Plaintiff served on Commander Victor Guerrieri after winning a verdict at trial and long after discovery closed. In that subpoena, Plaintiff seeks the deposition of Commander Guerrieri and documents pertaining to the wages and benefits Plaintiff would have been entitled to had he been promoted to the position of a canine handler back in January 2007. At the motion hearing held on September 18, 2014, Plaintiff explained that he directed the subpoena to Commander Guerrieri instead of the City because he intends to treat him as a Rule 30(b)(6) deponent. Accordingly, for purposes of resolving this motion only, the court treats the subpoena as if it had been served on the City of Chicago. Serving a discovery subpoena for testimony and documents on damages after a jury verdict is irregular. The City argues that it should not be compelled to comply with the subpoena because Plaintiff neglected his chance to gather the information he now seeks during the discovery period. The City's argument is not without merit. Discovery in this case closed back on June 15, 2012. (R. 168.) In fact, more than two years ago, on June 20, 2012, the parties reported to this court that they had completed all discovery. (R. 170.) This court terminated the referral and returned the case to the assigned District Judge based on this report. (Id.) However, during a hearing held on a separate motion on August 13, 2014, the assigned District Judge suggested to Plaintiff that he subpoena the information he needs from the City. (R. 375, Aug. 13, 2014 Hrg. Tr. at 2-3.) Plaintiff then issued the subject subpoena for the deposition of Commander Victor Guerrieri and various documents. Under these circumstances, this court must treat the assigned District Judge's suggestion as the court's permission to reopen discovery on the subject of wages and benefits Plaintiff lost because of unlawful discrimination. Accordingly, the City is ordered to respond to the subject subpoena (R. 376-1) with respect to its demand for documents, although the City is entitled to raise any objections it may have to the categories of documents sought. The City is not obligated to produce Commander Guerrieri for a deposition as the subpoena does not conform to the requirements of Rule 30(b)(6). Commander Guerrieri is not obligated to respond to the subpoena unless the City directs him otherwise. The City has until October 3, 2014, to respond to the subpoena. All matters relating to the referral of this action having been concluded, the referral is closed and the case is returned to the assigned District Judge. Mailed notice (ma,) (Entered: 09/19/2014)" @default.
- ilnd;;1:08-cv-03025_de383 AdministrativeID "383" @default.
- ilnd;;1:08-cv-03025_de383 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilnd;;1:08-cv-03025_de376 @default.