United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Northern Division
ABBY ROBINSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A NEW ENGLAND CONTRACTORS, LLC PLAINTIFF
BRIDGEWATER OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., MIKE ROSENTHAL AND JOHN / JANE DOES 1-5 DEFENDANTS
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL, GRANTING MOTION TO
EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINE, AND AMENDING CASE MANAGEMENT
the Court are two motions: (1) Defendants Bridgewater Owners
Association, Inc. (“BOA”) and Mike
Rosenthal's Motion to Compel certain interrogatory
responses from Plaintiff Abby Robinson , and (2)
Robinson's Motion to Extend Discovery Deadline and Trial
Date . Having considered the motions and responses, the
Court finds that both motions are well-taken and should be
and Procedural History
case concerns a disagreement between Defendants and Plaintiff
regarding whether the house Robinson built in the Bridgewater
Subdivision of Madison County, Mississippi, met with the
Bridgewater Subdivision's covenants and BOA's
building and architectural requirements. See  at
3;  at 2. Robinson claims that the house she constructed
through her company, New England Contractors, LLC., was fully
approved by Rosenthal, Bridgewater's Architectural Review
Coordinator, prior to construction. See  at
3. She claims that despite having approval of both
the original plans and subsequent modifications to those
plans, Defendants “harrasse[d], intimidated and/or
otherwise prevented [her] from the quiet enjoyment of her
property” and discriminated against her on account of
her race and gender. Id. at 4-5. The underlying
dispute between BOA and Robinson is the subject of ongoing
litigation in the Chancery Court of Madison County,
Mississippi. See  at 2.
Motion to Compel
served interrogatories on Robinson on January 19, 2017. .
Defendants now move to compel Robinson to give more complete
answers to two interrogatories. At issue are the following
interrogatories and responses:
Interrogatory No. 1: Please state
the addresses of all homes in which you have lived after the
age of 25, and the addresses of all homes constructed by you
or any construction company in which you owned an ownership
Response: Objection. This Interrogatory seeks
information that is not relevant to any party's claim or
defense and not proportional to the needs of the case.
Plaintiffs further object because this interrogatory is not
important in resolving the issues and is calculated to annoy,
embarrass and harass.
Supplemental Response: Without waiving the previous
objections, Plaintiff Abby Robinson states she has built the
houses at 100 Bridgewater Crossing and a house at 301
Buckingham Place, Ridgeland, Mississippi 39157.
Interrogatory No. 18: With regard
to those aspects or components of your home which differ from
the plans, specifications, and other documents which you
submitted to BOA, as described in your answer to the
preceding Interrogatory, please identify by address all other
homes within the Bridgewater Subdivision under the
jurisdiction of BOA which you contend have the same materials
or components as installed in your home.
Response: Please see Plaintiff's Response to
Interrogatory No. 18.
Supplemental Response: Objection. This Interrogatory
is confusing as it references the preceding Interrogatory but
fails to use the preceding Interrogatory's conjunctive
(“and”) language, resulting in a materially
different question. Without waiving said objection, please
see Plaintiffs' deposition testimony referencing specific
addresses of homes. Further, Plaintiffs will supplement,
again, in writing, the addresses which have the same
materials or components as installed at 100 Bridgewater
 at 2-4.
argue that these interrogatories are relevant because they
relate directly to the dispute between Defendants and
Robinson over the construction of her home, and seek
information that is likely to lead to the discovery of
admissible evidence. See, generally, .
Defendants contend that the existence of other houses that
Robinson has constructed is relevant, as she claims to be an
expert in construction.  at 2-3. Defendants allege that
Robinson claims the materials used in construction and the
architectural elements of her home are no different than
other homes in Bridgewater, making Robinson's knowledge
of the materials used in construction of the other homes
relevant. Id. at 4. Robinson responds that she
either already provided the requested information in her
deposition or that the interrogatories have little or no
relation to any claim or defense in this case.  at 2-3.
Motion to Extend the Discovery ...