Riley et al v. United States of America
| Margaret Riley and James W. Riley |
| United States of America |
| 2:2011cv02244 |
| April 26, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of Kansas |
| Kansas City Office |
| Lane |
| Eric F. Melgren |
| David J. Waxse |
| Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
51
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 38 Defendant's Motion to Compel Discovery. The motion is granted as to First Interrogatory Nos. 5-6, 9, and 12-16 to James Riley and Interrogatory Nos. 5-6, 9, and 12-16 to Margaret Ri ley. The motion is denied as to First Requests for Production Nos. 4-7 and 9 to James Riley and First Request Nos. 3-6 and 8 to Margaret Riley. For Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19 to Margaret Riley and Nos. 8 and 20-21 to James Riley, the motion is gran ted in part and denied in part. Plaintiffs shall serve amended answers to Interrogatory No. 19 to Margaret Riley and No. 21 to James Riley, but limited to injuries requiring hospitalization or extensive medical treatment during the last 20 years. I nterrogatory No. 8 to James Riley, Interrogatory No. 8 to Margaret Riley, and Interrogatory No. 20 to James Riley are also limited to a 20-year time period. All discovery ordered to be produced herein shall be produced within 30 days of the date of this Memorandum and Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 4/12/2012. (byk)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Kansas District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
