Williams v. Harmony Grove School District

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
EL DORADO DIVISION
ANGELIA WILLIAMS 	PLAINTIFF
v. 	Case No. 1:24-cv-01009
HARMONY GROVE
SCHOOL DISTRICT 	DEFENDANT
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff Angelia Williams’ (“Plaintiff”) Motion to Compel. (ECF No.
14). 	Defendant Harmony Grove School District (“Defendant”) has responded. 	(ECF No. 15).
The Court finds the matter ripe for consideration.
On September 18, 2024, Plaintiff sent Defendant the first set of interrogatories and
requests for production. 	(ECF No. 14, at 1). 	On October 15, 2024, Plaintiff received
Defendant’s responses to the interrogatories and production requests. 	(ECF No. 14, at 1).
Plaintiff contends that some of Defendant’s responses were incomplete, and that further
information was required. (ECF No. 14, at 1). On November 11, 2024, Plaintiff filed the instant
motion. (ECF No. 15).
In the motion, Plaintiff requests more information on Interrogatory ten (10), Interrogatory
fifteen (15), and Request for Production twelve (12). 	(ECF No. 14, at 2). 	In regard to
Interrogatory ten (10), Plaintiff requests the job title and date of termination for a district
employee. 	(ECF No. 14, at 2). 	In regard to Interrogatory fifteen (15), Plaintiff requests more
information related to any confidential Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charges or
grievances filed internally with Defendant. 	(ECF No. 14, at 2). In regard to Request for
Case 1:24-cv-01009-SOH Document 23 Filed 01/10/25 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
Production twelve (12), Plaintiff again requests that Defendant provide any emails containing the
expletives “fuck” or “fucking.” (ECF No. 14, at 2).
On November 19, 2024, Defendant responded and provided supplemental responses to
Plaintiff’s inquires. 	(ECF No. 15). 	In its supplemental response to Interrogatory ten (10),
Defendant provides the district employee’s job title and date of termination. 	(ECF No. 15-1, at
1). 	Its supplemental response to Interrogatory fifteen (15) states that it is only aware of the
instant case, along with the corresponding Office for Civil Rights complaint, by Plaintiff and a
desegregation case for which Defendant is a party. 	(ECF No. 15-1, at 2). 	Lastly, Defendant’s
supplemental response to Request for Production twelve (12) states that it has now provided
seventy-one pages of responsive documents that contain the requested two expletives.1 	(ECF
No. 15-1, at 3).
Plaintiff has not filed a reply to Defendant’s response or otherwise indicated if she is
satisfied with the supplemental responses. 	However, upon review of Defendant’s response, it
appears to the Court that Defendant has provided the information that Plaintiff requested.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel (ECF No. 14) is hereby DENIED AS MOOT in light
of Defendant’s supplemental responses.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 10th day of January, 2025.
/s/ Susan O. Hickey
Susan O. Hickey
Chief United States District Judge
1The parties appear to have narrowed the search terms requested in Request for Production twelve (12) to just
the two swear words via an email dated October 25, 2024. “I am requesting Defendant waive this objection
and provide any responsive email records containing the cuss words ‘fuck’ or ‘fucking,’ if such records exist . .
. .” (ECF No. 14-3, at 3).
Case 1:24-cv-01009-SOH Document 23 Filed 01/10/25 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>