IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

LEROY WILLIAMS, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

STATE OF ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF 

TRANSPORTATION and JOE MCINNES, 

etc., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 2:06-cv-658-ID 

MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE,

MOTION TO QUASH DEPOSITION NOTICES

COME NOW Defendants State of Alabama Department of Transportation and Joe 

McInnes, by and through their undersigned counsel, and move this Court to issue a protective 

order, or in the alternative, to quash certain deposition notices for the depositions of Alabama 

Department of Transportation employees Don Arkle and Thomas Lewis, and as grounds therefor 

state as follows: 

1. Plaintiff’s counsel has noticed the depositions of Don Arkle and Thomas Lewis 

for Thursday, May 3, 2007. (See notices attached hereto as “Exhibit A.”) 

2. Undersigned counsel first became aware of Plaintiff’s counsel’s desire to conduct 

the depositions by virtue of a telephone message, received by clerical staff, on Friday, April 27, 

2007, while counsel was out of the office. This message was not read by undersigned counsel 

until Monday, April 30, 2007. Counsel of record in this matter, in addition to the undersigned, 

include Jim R. Ippolito, Jr., and R. Mitchell Alton III, neither of whom was contacted concerning 

depositions. 

3. On Monday, April 27, 2007, the undersigned counsel personally spoke to 

Plaintiff’s counsel regarding the scheduling of depositions for Don Arkle and Thomas Lewis and 

Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 1 of 3
advised Plaintiff’s counsel that, due to the shortness of notice and other scheduled matters, 

scheduling depositions for the week of April 30 through May 4, 2007, was impracticable. 

Undersigned counsel advised Plaintiff’s counsel that he would ascertain available dates for these 

deposition and advise him accordingly. 

4. The Plaintiff’s noticing the depositions for these two employees upon such short 

notice works an unreasonable hardship upon both Defendants’ counsel and the employees and is 

not “reasonable notice” as required by Rule 30(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

Wherefore, premises considered, Defendants move this Court to issue a protective order 

or, in the alternative, quash the deposition notices for these employees until such other 

reasonable time as may be agreed upon by the parties. 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED 

TROY KING 

ATTORNEY GENERAL 

s/ Andrew W. Redd 

Jim R. Ippolito, Jr. (IPP001) 

Assistant Attorney General 

Chief Counsel 

Andrew W. Redd (RED001) 

R. Mitchell Alton, III (ALT003) 

Assistant Attorneys General 

Assistant Counsel 

ADDRESS OF COUNSEL: 

State of Alabama Department of Transportation 

1409 Coliseum Boulevard 

Montgomery, Alabama 36110 

Telephone: (334) 242-6350 

Facsimile: (334) 264-4359 

redda@dot.state.al.us 

2

Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 2 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

LEROY WILLIAMS, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

STATE OF ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF 

TRANSPORTATION and JOE MCINNES, 

etc., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 2:06-cv-658-ID 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that, on May 1, 2007, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk 

of the Court using the CM/ECT system, which will send notification to the following: 

Mr. Russell W. Adams, Esq. 

Wiggins, Childs, Quinn & Pantazis, L.L.C. 

Attorneys at Law 

301 19th Street, North 

Birmingham, Alabama 35203 

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF 

s/ Andrew W. Redd 

Andrew W. Redd (RED001) 

Assistant Attorney General 

Assistant Counsel 

ADDRESS OF COUNSEL: 

State of Alabama Department of Transportation 

1409 Coliseum Boulevard 

Montgomery, Alabama 36110 

(334) 242-6350 (office) 

(334) 264-4359 (facsimile) 

redda@dot.state.al.us 

3

Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 3 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20-2 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 1 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20-2 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 2 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20-2 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 3 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20-2 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 4 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20-2 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 5 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20-2 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 6 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20-2 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 7 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20-2 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 8 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20-2 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 9 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20-2 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 10 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20-2 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 11 of 12
Case 2:06-cv-00658-TFM Document 20-2 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 12 of 12