Docstoc

DEFENDANTS DISMAS CHARTIES_ INC._ ANA GISPERT_ DEREK THOMAS AND ADAMS LESHOTA’S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS TO COMPEL_ SUPPLEMENTAL MOTIONS AND MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY FROM PLAINTIFF

Document Sample
DEFENDANTS DISMAS CHARTIES_ INC._ ANA GISPERT_ DEREK THOMAS AND ADAMS LESHOTA’S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS TO COMPEL_ SUPPLEMENTAL MOTIONS AND MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY FROM PLAINTIFF Powered By Docstoc
					Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/12/2011 Page 1 of 6



                       IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
                           THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

                          CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON

  TRAIAN BUJDUVEANU,

         Plaintiff,

  vs.

  DISMAS CHARITIES, INC., ANA GISPERT,
  DEREK THOMAS and ADAMS LESHOTA

        Defendants.
  _________________________________________/

   DEFENDANTS DISMAS CHARTIES, INC., ANA GISPERT, DEREK THOMAS AND
   ADAMS LESHOTA’S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS TO COMPEL,
      SUPPLEMENTAL MOTIONS AND MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY FROM
                             PLAINTIFF

         Defendants Dismas Charities, Inc., Ana Gispert, Derek Thomas and Lashanda Adams,

  incorrectly identified as Adams Leshota (collectively “Defendants”) by and through their

  undersigned counsel, file their Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Motions to Compel, Supplemental

  Motions and Motion to Stay Discovery from Plaintiff and state as follows:

         1.      Plaintiff, a former Federal Inmate, has filed a vague and confusing lawsuit against

  his Community Correction Center/Half Way House, Dismas, and three of its employees, Gispert,

  Thomas and Lashanda Adams. The Complaint contains 50 paragraphs of “factual allegations”

  filed by a laundry list of four alleged Federal Theories of Recovery and six alleged state law

  theories of recovery. However, the Plaintiff cannot maintain any State or Federal cause of action

  against any defendant. The Defendants have filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit which has

  been briefed and pending ruling since June 5, 2011. Defendants believe that the disposition of
Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/12/2011 Page 2 of 6


                                            CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON

  that Motion will bring and end to this lawsuit and the need for discovery and ruling on the

  Plaintiffs’ discovery motions.

         2.      Despite the fact that the Defendants timely and properly responded to all

  discovery, Plaintiff filed four separate Motions and Supplemental Motions regarding

  Defendants’ discovery response. (See Docket Numbers 53, 58, 60 and 61).

         3.      The filing of these motions has required the Defendants to respond to all motions

  while their motion to dismiss has been pending since June, 2011. This has resulted in significant

  cost and time to Defendants and their counsel.

         4.      The Plaintiff, in filing these discovery Motions, has violated the Order Setting

  Trial Date, Pretrial Deadlines and Referral to Magistrate, docket number 44.

         5.      The Discovery Procedures for Magistrate Simonton, section C, No Written

  Motions, specifically states that:

         No written discovery motions, including motions to compel and motions for
         protective order shall be filed unless requested by Magistrate Judge
         Simonton. It is the intent of this procedure to minimize the necessity of
         Motions.

         6.      Despite the Court’s order, the Plaintiff continues to file discovery motions to

  compel even though the Magistrate has not requested a motion to compel.

         7.      Each time a motion is filed the Defendants’ counsel receives electronic notice

  from the Clerk of the Court of the Motion along with a date a response is required. Defendants

  have timely complied with the Clerks request to protect their rights, even though the Plaintiff’s

  motions are legal nullities (because no motions to compel were requested by the Magistrate).




                                                   2
Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/12/2011 Page 3 of 6


                                             CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON

         8.      As the Plaintiff has improperly filed discovery motions absent any request for a

  motion from the Magistrate Judge, the Plaintiffs Motions (Docket numbers 53, 58, 60 and 61)

  must be stricken.

         9.      Plaintiff should be ordered not to file any additional discovery motions unless

  instructed to do so by the Magistrate.

         10.     Plaintiff should also be sanctioned for improperly filing motions, including the

  Defendants attorneys’ fees to respond to the Motions, as per the deadlines set by the Clerk of

  Court electronically.

         11.     As a Motion to Dismiss is pending and the Plaintiff has propounded the allotted

  amount of 25 interrogatory questions, counting subparts to each Defendant, the Plaintiff should

  be stayed and prohibited from propounding additional discovery. This is especially true because

  if the Motion to Dismiss is granted, the lawsuit may become a legal nullity.

         12.     Defendants have had to spend time and attorneys’ fees responding to discovery

  concerning a complaint that may be dismissed. Accordingly, equity demands that the Plaintiff be

  stayed from propounding additional discovery until the Court rules on Defendants’ Motion to

  Dismiss the Complaint.




                                                  3
Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/12/2011 Page 4 of 6


                                           CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON




         WHEREFORE, Defendants Dismas Charities, Inc., Ana Gispert, Derek Thomas and

  Lashanda Adams, incorrectly identified as Adams Leshota respectfully request that Plaintiff’s

  Motion be denied and that the Court grant any further relief it deems appropriate, including

  sanctions against the Plaintiff.

                                            EISINGER, BROWN, LEWIS, FRANKEL,
                                            & CHAIET, P.A.
                                            Attorneys for Defendants
                                            4000 Hollywood Boulevard
                                            Suite 265-South
                                            Hollywood, FL 33021
                                            (954) 894-8000
                                            (954) 894-8015 Fax

                                            BY:     /S/ David S. Chaiet____________
                                                    DAVID S. CHAIET, ESQUIRE
                                                    FBN: 963798




                                               4
Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/12/2011 Page 5 of 6


                                           CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON



                                 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

         I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 12th day of October, 2011, I electronically filed the
  foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing
  document is being served this day on all counsel of record or pro se parties identified on the
  attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic
  Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties
  who are authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing.

                               __/s/ David S. Chaiet_______________
                               DAVID S. CHAIET, ESQUIRE
                               Florida Bar No. 963798




                                                5
Case 1:11-cv-20120-PAS Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/12/2011 Page 6 of 6


                                        CASE NO.: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON


                                     SERVICE LIST

                   Traian Bujduveanu v. Dismas Charities, Inc., et al.
                      Case No..: 11-20120-CIV-SEITZ/SIMONTON
                 United States District Court, Southern District of Florida


  Traian Bujduveanu
  Pro Se Plaintiff
  5601 W. Broward Blvd.
  Plantation, FL 33317

  Tel: (954) 316-3828
  Email: orionav@msn.com




                                             6

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: United States Courthouse,Southern District Of Florida,Traian Bujduveanu v. Dismas Charities,Ana Gispert,Derek Thomas,lashanda Adams