Harris v. Soley, 2000 ME 150 (2000)

Citation: Harris v. Soley, 2000 ME 150 (2000)
Parent Document: Harris v. Soley, 2000 ME 150 (2000)
Jurisdiction: Maine (state)
Effective Date: 2000-07-28
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1922039/harris-v-soley/ ↗

Full Text

796 chars

[¶ 12] In the matter before us, the court had before it evidence that Soley failed at every turn to comply with Rule 26, failed to cooperate in good faith in providing access to the apartment, failed to make witnesses reasonably available for deposition, and ultimately failed to comply with the court’s order compelling compliance with the rules. By the date first scheduled for hearing on the tenants’ motion for discovery sanctions — over seven months after the service of the complaint and first request for documents, two days short of the close of discovery, and more than a month after the date by which compliance had been ordered by the court — Soley had produced not a single document, the apartment had not been made available for inspection, and only one deposition had been taken. 11

Other Sections in This Document (117)

Full Text