Facts
- Plaintiff Brittney Felder was hired by Defendant MGM National Harbor, LLC, as an Asst. Retail Manager at the SJP Boutique in the summer of 2017 and claims she faced employment discrimination based on her skin color leading to her termination. [lines="24-31"].
- The court issued a scheduling order setting December 30, 2022, as the deadline for discovery, after which Plaintiff filed a motion to compel the Defendant for responses to various interrogatories. [lines="32-34"].
- Subsequently, the court granted Defendant's extension request, pushing the discovery deadline to February 28, 2023, and later extended it again to June 23, 2023. [lines="41-105"].
- On the final discovery deadline, Defendant provided over 900 pages of documents but cited its video retention policy as a reason for lack of relevant footage from the days surrounding Felder's termination. [lines="109-121"].
- Plaintiff claimed that Defendant engaged in spoliation by destroying video footage pertinent to her claims and sought sanctions against the Defendant for various alleged discovery misconducts. [lines="188-203"], [lines="206-208"].
Issues
- Whether Defendant spoliated evidence by failing to preserve critical video footage relevant to Felder's claims. [lines="189-210"].
- Whether Defendant acted in bad faith during the discovery process and failed to comply with discovery orders. [lines="199-200"].
- Whether Defendant's responses to Felder's Requests for Admission were evasive or insufficient under Fed. R. Civ. P. 36. [lines="902-910"].
Holdings
- The court found no spoliation occurred as Defendant had no obligation to preserve the video footage that was recorded over in accordance with its policy, given that litigation was not anticipated prior to November 2017. [lines="610-612"].
- The court ruled that the Defendant's conduct did not support a finding of bad faith in the context of discovery or the requirements of the litigation process. [lines="1223-1243"].
- The court upheld that Defendant adequately responded to Felder's Requests for Admission, denying allegations of evasion or insufficiency as noted by Felder. [lines="1001-1012"].
OPINION
MISTY DILLINGER v. JAMELL CONTRACTORS LLC
No. 4:22-cv-1097-DPM
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION
31 May 2024
D.P. Marshall Jr.
ORDER
The joint motion, Doc. 29, is granted. The proposed settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate. Lynn‘s Food Stores, Inc. v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1353 (11th Cir. 1982); see also Barbee v. Big River Steel, LLC, 927 F.3d 1024, 1027 (8th Cir. 2019); Melgar v. OK Foods, 902 F.3d 775, 779 (8th Cir. 2018). It reflects a good-faith compromise of the parties’ wage-related dispute. And the attorney‘s fee, though allocated in the settlement agreement, was negotiated separately. The Court will dismiss the complaint with prejudice and retain jurisdiction for a time to enforce the settlement.
So Ordered.
D.P. Marshall Jr.
United States District Judge
31 May 2024
