CHITTENDEN
v.
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate good cause or excusable neglect for filing a motion to compel a deposition and reopen discovery after the deadline had passed.
Plaintiff sued Hillsborough County for sex discrimination and retaliation. The plaintiff moved to compel a deposition and extend discovery after the d…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion To Compel Deposition cases and more on FLexlaw
James Chittenden moves to compel Dr. Matthew Stewart, a former Hillsborough County employee, to appear at a deposition and to extend the discovery deadline for thirty days. (Doc. 24). Hillsborough County does not oppose Mr. Chittenden’s requests, but did respond in an effort to provide more information. (Id. at ¶ 6; Doc. 27).
I. INTRODUCTION
In state court, Mr. Chittenden sued Hillsborough County for alleged sex discrimination and retaliation. (Doc. 1, Ex. 2). Hillsborough County removed the case to this court. (Doc. 1).
On July 29, 2019, the court issued its Case Management and Scheduling Order (CMSO), which included an August 10, 2020 discovery deadline and a September 18, 2020 dispositive motion deadline. (Doc. 10).
On March 23, 2020, the court entered an order for civil cases about CMSOs, given the COVID-19 pandemic. (Doc. 17). The order extended all dates in the CMSO by sixty days.1 (Id. at p. 2). The order also stated: This sixty-day extension is automatic and parties need not, and should not, file motions requesting or confirming this extension. Requests for additional extensions in addition to the automatic sixty-day extension herein are disfavored. The Court will not be issuing Amended Case Management and Scheduling Orders in each civil case specifying revised dates and deadlines; parties are responsible for calculating and calendaring all new dates and deadlines as indicated herein.
(Id.). Based on the March 23 order, the extended discovery deadline was October 9, 2020, and the extended dispositive motion deadline was November 17, 2020. Neither party moved to extend those deadlines further.
On November 17, 2020, Hillsborough County timely moved for summary judgment. (Doc. 20). Four days before Mr. Chittenden’s deadline to respond to Hillsborough County’s motion, Mr. Chittenden moves to compel the deposition of Dr. Stewart and to extend the discovery deadline for thirty days.2 (Doc. 24). In his motion, Mr. Chittenden details his attempts to take Dr. Stewart’s deposition since November 2019.3 (Doc. 24, Ex. 1). Mr. Chittenden scheduled in-person depositions for Dr. 1 The court also filed a notice rescheduling the pretrial conference from February 10, 2021 to April 14, 2021. (Doc. 18).
(Id.). Hillsborough County noted Dr. Stewart did appear for the August 24, 2020 virtual deposition but was driving his vehicle and could not review the documents. (Id.).
II. ANALYSIS
Mr. Chittenden requests a thirty-day extension of the discovery deadline—a deadline that ended fifty days before Mr. Chittenden filed his motion. Because the discovery deadline has passed, the court construes that Mr. Chittenden seeks to reopen discovery to take Dr. Stewart’s deposition, and that the court should compel Dr. Stewart to appear at a properly noticed deposition.
United States Courts, https://www.uscourts.gov/forms/notice-lawsuit-summonssubpoena/subpoena-testify-deposition-civil-action (last updated Feb. 1, 2014).
28, 2020—over seven weeks after the discovery deadline. (See Doc. 24). Instead, Mr. Chittenden argues he tried to schedule Dr. Stewart’s deposition without court intervention. (Id. at ¶ 7). In May 2020, Mr. Chittenden deposed Dr. Stewart but adjourned the deposition with a plan to have a second day of the deposition to allow Dr. Stewart to testify about documents. (Doc. 27, p. 2). In August 2020, Dr. Stewart appeared for the second deposition but was driving and could not review the documents. (Id.). Mr. Chittenden could have sought court relief at this point. Mr. Chittenden also could have sought relief from the court immediately after Dr. Stewart failed to show up for the October 27, 2020 deposition. Mr. Chittenden cannot now demonstrate good cause or excusable neglect to support bringing this motion so long after these deposition issues began. Even though Hillsborough County does not object to Mr. Chittenden’s requests to reopen discovery and compel the deposition of Dr. Stewart, Hillsborough County timely moved for summary judgment. (Doc. 20). The effect of permitting Mr. Chittenden more time and another opportunity to attempt to secure additional testimony from Dr. Stewart (which may or may not prove fruitful) is further delay and likely more briefing to address Dr. Stewart’s additional testimony. This additional time would cause delay in moving this case towards its conclusion.
III. CONCLUSION
Mr. Chittenden failed to show good cause or excusable neglect on why he did not come to the court sooner for an extension of the discovery deadline and to get a court order compelling Dr. Stewart to appear for a second deposition. Thus, Mr. Chittenden’s motion to compel Dr. Stewart for a deposition and to reopen discovery (Doc. 24) is DENIED.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on December2, 2020. Aranda. [...] he Sarsing_
AMANDA ARNOLD SANSONE
United States Magistrate Judge