Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-5_05-cv-05214/USCOURTS-arwd-5_05-cv-05214-5/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Faught
Defendant
Fields
Defendant
Steven E. Wanbaugh
Plaintiff

Document Text:

AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

-1-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION

STEVEN E. WANBAUGH PLAINTIFF

v. Civil No. 05-5214

 

OFFICER FIELDS, Fayetteville

Police Department; and OFFICER

FAUGHT, Fayetteville Police Department DEFENDANTS

O R D E R

This case is currently scheduled for a non-jury trial on March 27, 2008. On January 30,

2008, defendants filed a motion for sanctions (Doc. 31) pursuant to Rule 37(d) of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure. In the motion, defendants' counsel states he conducted a telephone

conference call with the plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, on December 10, 2007. During the

conference call, plaintiff's mailing address was verified and plaintiff agreed to travel to

Bentonville, Arkansas, for his deposition. Plaintiff lives in Siloam Springs, Arkansas. Plaintiff

agreed to notify defendants' counsel if he needed to reschedule his deposition. Plaintiff was also

advised of the importance of appearing for his deposition. 

On December 12, 2007, defendants' counsel followed up on the telephone conference call

by letter and notice of deposition. The notice scheduled the deposition for January 10, 2008, at

1:00 p.m. The document were mailed to the address confirmed by the plaintiff to be his correct

mailing address in the call on December 10th.

On January 10th, the plaintiff failed to show at his deposition. Defendants' counsel then

attempted to contact plaintiff on his cellular telephone and left a message. Defendants' counsel

Case 5:05-cv-05214-JRM Document 35 Filed 03/04/08 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

-2-

also contacted a number plaintiff had provided and indicated was his sister's residence.

Plaintiff's brother answered the telephone. Plaintiff's brother agreed to attempt to locate the

plaintiff. Plaintiff's brother subsequently phoned back and advised defendants' counsel that

plaintiff was working in Paris, Arkansas, and would not be appearing at the deposition.

Plaintiff's brother also stated the plaintiff had indicated he was not aware of the deposition.

Finally, plaintiff's brother stated plaintiff's sister "must not have gotten the letter to him." 

Defendants' counsel went on the record at 1:40 p.m. and made a record of plaintiff's

failure to appear. Defendants' counsel asks for an award of fees and expenses in the amount of

$1241 incurred for attempted deposition of the plaintiff. Defendants also ask that plaintiff be

ordered to appear for his deposition at the office of defendants' counsel in Little Rock within ten

(10) days of the court's order and plaintiff's payment of their expenses of the first deposition. 

Plaintiff has not responded to the motion for sanctions. We note also that plaintiff has

not filed his response to the court's scheduling order. Plaintiff's response to the court's

scheduling order (Doc. 22) was due thirty days prior to the scheduled trial date–or by February

27th. 

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 37(d) if a party fails to appear for a

deposition after being served with proper notice, the district court "may make such orders in

regard to the failure as are just." See e.g., Boogaerts v. Bank of Bradley, 961 F.2d 765, 768 (8th

Cir. 1992). The court may, among other things, require the party failing to act to pay the

reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, caused by the failure, or enter an order dismissing

the action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37 (d). The court has wide latitude in imposing sanctions for failure

to comply with discovery. See e.g., Aziz v. Wright, 34 F.3d 587 (8th Cir. 1994). 

Case 5:05-cv-05214-JRM Document 35 Filed 03/04/08 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

-3-

The defendants' motion for sanctions (Doc. 31) is granted. Pursuant to Rule 37(d) of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, plaintiff is hereby ordered to pay the defendants the amount

of $1241, the sum defendants incurred in attempting to take plaintiff's deposition on January 10,

2008. Following the payment of the reasonable expenses and attorney's fees, plaintiff is further

ordered to appear for his deposition at counsel for defendants' office in Little Rock within ten

(10) days. Until plaintiff complies with this order, this case is stayed and administratively

terminated. The evidentiary hearing scheduled for March 27th is canceled. Plaintiff may upon

payment of the fees and completion of his deposition, file a motion to reopen this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 4th day of March 2008.

/s/ J. Marschewski 

HON. JAMES R. MARSCHEWSKI 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 5:05-cv-05214-JRM Document 35 Filed 03/04/08 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>