Martello v. PRODUCT QUEST MANUFACTURING, LLC, Dist. Court, MD Florida 2014 – Google Scholar.
The court explains its decision:
“Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this deadline is the culmination of several months of abusive discovery practices, vexatious tactics, and brazen disregard of Court orders. The Court has considered lesser sanctions, such as striking Plaintiff’s expert report or treating certain facts as admitted, but the level of misconduct present here threatens not only Defendants’ ability to litigate this case, but the integrity of the Court and its Orders. Accordingly, for the reasons stated herein, the Court will dismiss this action as a sanction for Plaintiff’s serious and continuing refusal to obey Court orders….
The facts outlined in Part I of this Order demonstrate a pattern of dilatory and duplicitous litigation tactics as well as blatant disobedience of Court orders. Plaintiff’s ongoing failure to comply with the Court’s orders is intentional and done in bad faith. She has ignored the imposition of one round of sanctions, and multiple threats of further sanctions, stemming from her refusal to produce her tax returns. All the while, Plaintiff knew that this case was advancing inexorably toward a July trial date. The Court gave Plaintiff as many chances to rectify the discovery violations as possible, but her intentional and ongoing refusal to do so leaves the Court with no choice but to impose the ultimate sanction and dismiss this case. No other sanction would adequately address Plaintiff’s bad faith or protect the integrity of the Court and its Orders.”
It is noteworthy that the court dismissed the lawsuit on its own motion. The defendants did not request dismissal. The case was dismissed when the defendants notified the court that the plaintiff had failed to produce tax returns.
Edward X. Clinton, Jr.
fedcivilprocedure 