Lendmark Financial Services, LLC v. Garret, Ledena B

If the dates proposed by Plaintiffs do not work for defense counsel, defense counsel should be prepared to provide a date that will work. Whatever date that is, Mr. Schmidt and his counsel will be ordered to appear on that date. If they have a conflict with the deposition date selected by Ford then they will need to make any arrangements necessary to ensure that they appear on that date. Otherwise terminating sanctions will be imposed. As to Plaintiff Susan Schmidt, the request for terminating sanctions is GRANTED.

The Court is inclined to deny terminating sanctions as to Mr. Schmidt primarily based on the fact he has proposed concrete dates for deposition. The vague promise that Susan Schmidt is “willing and able to coordinate dates” is woefully inadequate considering the history of discovery abuse culminating in the March 11 order, and the fact it has now been 1.5 years since Defendant began attempting to schedule these depositions. Accordingly, Plaintiff Susan Schmidt is dismissed from the case with prejudice.

Plaintiffs and their counsel are sanctioned, jointly and severally, in the additional amount of $1,500.00, payable within 30 days’ notice of this order.

4. 24CV04294 Lendmark Financial Services, LLC v. Garret, Ledena B

EVENT: Motion for Service of the Summons and Complaint By Electronic Means

Motion for Service of the Summons and Complaint By Electronic Means is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall prepare a form of order.

5. 25CV01796 Capital One, NA successor by merger to Discover Bank v. Sweet, Michelle

EVENT: Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment or in the Alternative Summary Adjudication

Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. The Court will sign the proposed order and judgment.

2|Page