Heiderscheid v. Russell

Background

Deputy Cartier Russell served Andrew Erik Heiderscheid with interrogatories and requests for documents on November 16, 2018. Heiderscheid did not respond. Russell’s counsel sent a January 22, 2019 letter seeking the overdue responses, but Heiderscheid still had not responded by the time of the court’s order.

Russell moved to compel discovery, meaning he asked the court to order Heiderscheid to provide the required answers and documents. The court held a hearing on March 6, 2019. Heiderscheid did not attend. The court was also informed that he had recently failed to attend a hearing in a separate case. Counsel indicated that Heiderscheid might have changed addresses, and the court stated that keeping the court informed of his current address and monitoring the case docket were his responsibilities.

Ruling

The court granted Russell’s motion to compel under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(3)(B)(iii)–(iv). It ordered Heiderscheid to fully respond to Russell’s first set of interrogatories and fully respond to Russell’s first requests for production of documents and things, both within 30 days of the order.

The court stated that failure to comply could result in sanctions, up to and including dismissal of the action with prejudice. The court did not dismiss the action in this order; it stated that Russell could later seek dismissal as a discovery sanction, for failure to comply with court orders, and for failure to prosecute.