Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Tucker v. Walgreen Co.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


December 19, 2005

JOHN TUCKER, ANGELA MILLER, JOVAN HANEY, LEON BRADLEY, ARIEN JACKSON, WILLIAM STRICKLAND, OSCAR GREEN, MIKE JACKSON, KEVIN RIDDLE, AVERY ANDERSON, MALICA PAGE, TRACI DANSBERRY, CHRIS DARGIN, AND CARLOS ZIMMERMAN, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
WALGREEN COMPANY, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Murphy, Chief District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This putative class action is before the Court on Defendant's objections to and appeal of the Order issued on November 22, 2005, by United States Magistrate Judge Clifford J. Proud granting in part and denying in part Plaintiffs' motion to compel responses to their first request for production of documents. The Court has carefully reviewed all of the relevant documents and finds that a hearing is not necessary; therefore, Defendant's motion for a hearing (Doc. 42) is DENIED.

Magistrate Judge Proud looked at the issues presented and understood the difference between what is discoverable and what is admissible. See FED. R. CIV. P. 26(b)(1). This distinction disposes of all of the arguments raised in Defendant's objections. Nothing in Magistrate Judge Proud's Order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(a); SDIL-LR 73.1(a). Accordingly, Magistrate Judge Proud's November 22, 2005, Order is AFFIRMED. Defendant shall not further delay discovery.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

G. PATRICK MURPHY Chief United States District Judge

20051219

© 1992-2005 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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