UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

NICK J. MARTIN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Case No. 1:13-cv-00016-SLC

)

GEORGE JONES, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

OPINION AND ORDER

Before the Court is a one-page document entitled “Response to the Order [of] the Court

for Defendants as to Discovery Request” (DE 96) filed on July 1, 2015, by pro se Plaintiff, Nick

Martin. In the document, Martin asserts that Defendants did not act in good faith with respect to

the Court’s Order dated June 16, 2015, granting in part and denying in part his motions to

compel (the “Order”). (DE 93). He asks that the Court enter a default judgment against

Defendants as a sanction for their purported failure to comply with the Court’s Order. (DE 93 at

2).

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b) provides that “[i]f a party . . . fails to obey an order

to provide or permit discovery, . . . the court where the action is pending may issue further just

orders[, including] . . . rendering a default judgment against the disobedient party . . . .” Fed. R.

Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A). “The simple failure to comply is enough [to warrant sanctions],

notwithstanding a complete lack of culpability on [the plaintiff’s] part.” Halas v. Consumer

Servs., Inc., 16 F.3d 161, 164 (7th Cir. 1994). That is, “the culpability of a party who fails to

comply with a court order determines only which sanctions the court should impose and not

whether any sanctions are appropriate at all.” Id. (citations omitted). “[A]n award of sanctions
must be proportionate to the circumstances surrounding the failure to comply with discovery.” 

Crown Life Ins. Co. v. Craig, 995 F.2d 1376, 1382 (7th Cir. 1993). 

In that regard, “a showing of willfulness, bad faith, or fault is necessary only when

dismissal or default is imposed as a discovery sanction.” e360 Insight, Inc. v. Spamhaus Project,

658 F.3d 637, 642 (7th Cir. 2011) (collecting cases). The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has

“noted many times that a default judgment is a harsh sanction that ought to be used sparingly.”

Christiansen v. Adams, 251 F.R.D. 358, 360 (7th Cir. 2008) (quoting C.K.S. Eng’rs, Inc. v. White

Mountain Gypsum Co., 726 F.2d 1202, 1209 (7th Cir. 1984)). That is, “[a] default judgment

should be used only in extreme situations, or when other less drastic sanctions have proven

unavailing.” Sun v. Bd. of Trs. of Univ. of Ill., 473 F.3d 799, 811 (7th Cir. 2007) (citing C.K.S.

Eng’rs, Inc., 726 F.2d at 1209).

Here, Martin’s cursory request for a default judgment as a sanction against Defendants is

unpersuasive. There is no evidence that Defendants acted in bad faith with respect to the Order,

as they filed their supplemental discovery responses by the date set forth in the Order, signed by

all of the Jones Defendants. (DE 94; DE 95). With respect to Defendant England, this case has

been automatically stayed against him until the termination of his bankruptcy case. (DE 93 at 2).

Also, in a cursory paragraph at the end of his response to Defendants’ motion for

summary judgment (DE 101), Martin revisits his dissatisfaction with Defendants’ discovery

responses, listing various portions of his discovery requests that he feels were unsatisfactorily

answered. However, Martin does not suggest, much less make a good faith showing, that he

cannot present facts essential to justify his opposition to Defendants’ summary judgment motion. 

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d); Kalis v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., 231 F.3d 1049, 1058 n.5 (7th Cir.

2000); Yessenow v. Hudson, No. 2:08 cv 353, 2011 WL 3667488, at *2 (N.D. Ind. Aug 22,
2011). Nor does he identify the material facts that he anticipates he would discover if the

discovery requests were answered to his satisfaction. Larsen v. Elk Grove Vill., Ill., 433 F.

App’x 470, 472 (7th Cir. 2011) (unpublished); Yessenow, 2011 WL 3667488, at *2. Therefore,

to the extent Martin’s response (DE 96) could be construed as a motion under Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 56(d), it is DENIED. 

SO ORDERED. 

Entered this 2nd day of December 2015.

/s/ Susan Collins 

Susan Collins

United States Magistrate Judge