Submitted: November 17, 2017
Defendant's Motion to Dismiss GRANTED.
L. Rocanelli Judge.
consideration of the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant
Anthony Joseph Mitchell ("Defendant"); the facts,
arguments, and legal authorities set forth by the parties;
the Superior Court Civil Rules; statutory and decisional
precedent; and the entire record in this case, the Court
hereby finds as follows:
December 27, 2016, Plaintiff Julie Reynolds
("Plaintiff") brought this action against Defendant
alleging that she suffered personal injuries as a result of
an automobile accident caused by Defendant. Plaintiff is
March 7, 2017, Defendant filed Interrogatories and a Request
for Production directed to Plaintiff. Plaintiff did not
provide any discovery responses.
April 7, 2017, Defendant filed a Motion to Compel Rule 3(h)
Production and Executed Medical and Employment
Authorizations. The Motion to Compel was scheduled to be
heard by the Court on May 9, 2017 and Plaintiff was given
notice to appear. Plaintiff did not respond to
Defendant's Motion to Compel and did not appear in court.
Accordingly, the Court granted Defendant's Motion to
Plaintiff did not provide Rule 3(h) documentation or execute
employment and medical authorizations pursuant to the
Court's May 9, 2017 Order.
June 29, 2017, Defendant filed a Motion for Rule to Show
Cause for Plaintiff's failure to comply with the May 9,
2017 Order. Defendant also filed a Motion to Compel
Plaintiff's Answers to Discovery for Plaintiff's
failure to provide discovery responses.
Court heard oral argument on Defendant's Motion for Rule
to Show Cause and Defendant's Motion to Compel discovery
responses on July 18, 2017. Plaintiff did not respond to
either motion and, despite having notice to appear, did not
appear in court. Accordingly, the Court granted
Defendant's motions and gave Plaintiff twenty days to
Defendant sent the Court's July 18, 2017 Orders to
Plaintiff via certified mail on July 19, 2017. On August 16,
2017, the Court's Orders were returned unclaimed to
August 29, 2017, Defense Counsel received a message from
Plaintiff's mother requesting that all correspondence to
Plaintiff be re-sent to a different address. Defense Counsel
complied with this request. However, despite Defense
Counsel's efforts to correspond with Plaintiff, Plaintiff
has not responded to any of the discovery requests or
addition, Plaintiff has not complied with the Court's May
9, 2017 Order or its July 18, 2017 Orders. Plaintiff also
failed to comply with the Court's scheduling order dated
April 19, 2017, which required Plaintiff to identify experts
and file expert reports by September 29, 2017.
Thus, the record demonstrates that Plaintiff has not
participated in this ...