Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-2_07-cv-02237/USCOURTS-alnd-2_07-cv-02237-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract

---

Due to the confusion concerning defendants’ legal names, 1

noted infra, the court lists these corporate defendants assuming

that they all do, or did at one time, legally exist. The court

awaits clarification. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ADWAY LEASING, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

SMITH LOGISTICS, INC., et

al.,

Defendants.

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

CIVIL ACTION NO.

07-AR-2237-S

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

This case comes before the court on various motions of

plaintiff, Adway Leasing, Inc., to compel defendants, All American

Xpress, Inc. (“All American”), Smith Logistics, Inc., Smithway

Transportation Inc., Smithway Logistics Inc., Kenneth B. Smith, 1

and Kenneth J. Smith (hereinafter “defendants”), to answer

questions to interrogatories. Plaintiff also moves to deem several

of defendants’ responses, or lack thereof, admitted. Defendants

Smithway Logistics, Inc. and Smith Logistics Inc. also move for

sanctions against plaintiff, alleging plaintiff failed to comply

with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

On August 29, 2008, the court held a hearing on plaintiff’s

discovery motions. The court will not rule on plaintiff’s motions

until the completion of discovery. The court and the parties agree

FILED

 2008 Sep-03 PM 01:15

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 2:07-cv-02237-WMA Document 51 Filed 09/03/08 Page 1 of 3
that cooperative discovery should remedy most of, if not all,

these disputes. However, plaintiff may raise the same objections

upon completion of discovery. Of note, plaintiff, All American, and

the court agree that plaintiff’s motion to compel defendant All

American is MOOT. 

The court and the parties likewise agree that plaintiff may

inspect and copy any/all of defendants’ documents. Plaintiff shall

bear the cost of the copying service. Defendants may provide a

person to oversee the copying service in order to prevent damage to

defendants’ files. The parties shall determine the time and place

for inspection. 

Due to ambiguity in the pleadings, the court orders the

plaintiff to provide the accurate legal name of each named

defendant, defendants to fully cooperate with plaintiff in this

regard, and plaintiff to file this information with the court by

the end of discovery, December 1, 2008. 

Defendants’ motion for sanctions is DENIED.

DONE this 3rd day of September, 2008.

_____________________________

WILLIAM M. ACKER, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:07-cv-02237-WMA Document 51 Filed 09/03/08 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:07-cv-02237-WMA Document 51 Filed 09/03/08 Page 3 of 3