Nagle et al v. Gusman et al, No. 2:2012cv01910 - Document 289 (E.D. La. 2016)
Court Description: ORDER AND REASONS - the Court AFFIRMS the Magistrate Judges order 210 . Darryle Jackson and his counsel of record are jointly liable to plaintiffs in the amount of $6,666.80.. Signed by Judge Sarah S. Vance on 2/17/16. (NEF: Mag2)(jjs)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Nagle et al v. Gusman et al Doc. 289 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA MARGARET GOETZEE NAGLE and J OHN ERIC GOETZEE CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 12-1910 SHERIFF MARLIN GUSMAN, ET AL. SECTION "R" (2) ORD ER AN D REASON S On December 3, 20 15, plaintiffs Margaret Goetzee Nagle and J ohn Eric Goetzee m oved the Court for sanctions after defendant Darryle J ackson did not appear at his scheduled deposition on Novem ber 16, 20 15. 1 J ackson failed to oppose plaintiffs’ m otion. 2 On December 23, 20 15, the Magistrate J udge granted plaintiffs’ m otion in part and assessed $ 6,666.80 in sanctions against J ackson and his counsel. 3 J ackson now objects to the Magistrate J udge’s ruling as “unjust” because J ackson was only one of several defendants scheduled to be deposed that week, and the other depositions proceeded as planned. 4 1 R. Doc. 20 5. 2 See R. Doc. 210 at 1. 3 Id. at 3. 4 See R. Doc. 222. Dockets.Justia.com The Court finds that J ackson has not shown that the Magistrate J udge’s ruling is “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(A); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). J ackson does not dispute that he failed to appear at his scheduled deposition. Nor does J ackson offer any reason for his failing to appear. Plaintiffs presented extensive evidence to support their request for attorneys’ fees and expenses in the form of sanctions. The Magistrate J udge granted that request only in part and excluded all fees and expenses relating to one of plaintiffs’ attorneys. J ackson’s argument that it is unjust for him to pay m ore than a portion of the other attorneys’ expenses because plaintiffs’ counsel would have incurred these expenses “regardless of whether Darryle J ackson appeared” is unavailing. 5 Had J ackson appeared at his deposition in November 20 15, plaintiffs’ counsel could have avoided incurring the additional expenses associated with scheduling a second deposition for J ackson in February 20 16. 6 This objection is overruled. 5 6 Id. at 4. J ackson was ultim ately deposed on February 2, 20 16. See R. Doc. 210 ; R. Doc. 279. Accordingly, the Court AFFIRMS the Magistrate J udge’s order. 7 Darryle J ackson and his counsel of record are jointly liable to plaintiffs in the am ount of $ 6,666.80 . 17th New Orleans, Louisiana, this _ _ _ day of February, 20 16. ____________________________________ SARAH S. VANCE UNITED STATES DISTRICT J UDGE 7 R. Doc. 210 .
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
