Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Barnhouse v. Honda of America Mfg.

August 10, 2006

RUSSELL BARNHOUSE, PLAINTIFF,
v.
HONDA OF AMERICA MFG., INC., DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: George C. Smith, Judge United States District Court

JUDGE SMITH

Magistrate Judge Kemp

ORDER

Magistrate Judge Kemp issued an order on September 21, 2005 (Doc. 15), granting in part Defendant's Motion to Compel Discovery (Doc. 7), and the discovery at issue to be completed within 60 days of the order and all discovery to be completed within 60 days after the identification of Honda's expert witness. Defendant Honda of America Mfg., Inc filed Objections to the Magistrate's Order on October 3, 2005 (Doc. 16). Plaintiff Russell Barnhouse also filed Objections to the Magistrate's Order on the same day (Doc. 17).

Plaintiff objects to the Magistrate's Order and argues that the information sought by Honda is irrelevant and not likely to lead to discoverable information. Plaintiff also seeks an order by this Court that the second opinion obtained by Honda is final and binding. The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Order in light of Plaintiff's Objections, and finds that the Magistrate Judge's decision is neither clearly erroneous, nor is it contrary to the law. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A); Fed. R. Civ. 72(a). The Court therefore AFFIRMS the Magistrate Judge's September 21, 2005 Order.

The Court has also reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Order in light of Defendant's Objections. Defendant objects to the time limitations imposed by the order. The Court has reviewed the Order and finds that the Magistrate Judge was reasonable in placing the time restrictions on the discoverable information. The Court will, however, extend the time period from April 2004 until July 2004, when Plaintiff was actually separated from Honda. All other time limitations set by the Magistrate Judge are affirmed.

While the September 21, 2005 Order by the Magistrate Judge was still in effect even in light of the pending objections, see S.D. Ohio L.R. 72.4, the Court will nonetheless provide additional time for the parties to complete the discovery. All discovery at issue in this Order shall be completed by October 20, 2006. Honda may then designate an expert on this issue by November 30, 2006. Any rebuttal expert for Plaintiff shall be designated by December 30, 2006. All discovery in this case shall be completed by February 28, 2007. Any case-dispositive motions shall be filed no later than March 30, 2007.

The Clerk shall remove Doc. 16 and Doc. 17 from the Court's pending motions list.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20060810

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.