Adkins v. Adkins

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
IN RE:
DENNIS C. ADKINS,
Debtor.
______________________________
BENJAMIN A. ADKINS,
Plaintiff,
v.
DENNIS C. ADKINS,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CHAPTER 7
CASE NO. 11-62177
ADV. NO. 11-6084
JUDGE RUSS KENDIG
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
(NOT FOR PUBLICATION)
On April 5, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking a court order to admit outstanding
requests for admissions served on February 15, 2012. 	Defendant filed a response opposing the
motion on April 5, 2012.1 For the reasons outlined in this opinion, the court finds the motion is
not well-taken.
The court has jurisdiction of this case under 28 U.S.C. § 1334 and the general order of
reference entered in this district on July 16, 1984, now superseded by General Order 2012-7 dated
April 4, 2012. 	In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1409, venue in this district and division is proper.
This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(B).
This opinion is not intended for publication or citation. 	The availability of this opinion, in
1 Interestingly, the response actually precedes the motion on the docket.
time and date indicated, which may be materially different from its entry on the record.
of this court the document set forth below. This document was signed electronically at the
The court incorporates by reference in this paragraph and adopts as the findings and orders
Dated: 02:03 PM May 21, 2012
11-06084-rk Doc 16 FILED 05/21/12 ENTERED 05/21/12 14:32:11 Page 1 of 2

electronic or printed form, is not the result of a direct submission by the court.
Plaintiff relies on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 36(a)(3), adopted into bankruptcy
practice through Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7036, as a basis for the relief sought. 	The
rule states that “[a] matter is deemed admitted unless, within 30 days after being served, the party
to whom the request is directed serves on the requesting party a written answer or objection.”
According to Plaintiff, the discovery was served on February 15, 2012 and no timely response was
received.
Plaintiff failed to bring this motion before the court in the manner prescribed by Local
Bankruptcy Rule 7026-1. 	Under the local rule, courts do not consider discovery disputes “unless
the party seeking discovery shall first advise the Court in writing that, after personal consultation
and sincere attempts to resolve differences, the parties are unable to reach an accord.”
Loc.Bankr.R. 7026-1. 	Plaintiff has presented no evidence of any attempts to resolve this matter
with opposing counsel prior to filing its discovery motion.
This case provides a very clear illustration of why the local rule exists. 	It appears this
matter was fully resolvable without any court intervention with a simple phone call or email.
According to Defendant, the failure to respond was a simple oversight. 	Responses to the
admissions were timely drafted but inadvertently not mailed before counsel’s paralegal went on
maternity leave. 	Upon receiving the Rule 36(a)(3) motion, counsel immediately forwarded the
responses. 	Plaintiff’s counsel did not dispute any of these facts at a pretrial held on May 9, 2012.
The Motion for Order that Request for Admissions be Deemed Admitted will be denied by
an order to be issued immediately.
It is so ordered.
# 	# 	#
Service List:
J Jeffrey Heck
The Heck Law Offices, Ltd.
1 Marion Avenue
Suite 104
Mansfield, OH 44903
Charles T Robinson
3 N Main St
Richland Bank Bldg
#400
Mansfield, OH 44902-1708
11-06084-rk Doc 16 FILED 05/21/12 ENTERED 05/21/12 14:32:11 Page 2 of 2