In a recent court session, a motion to stay discovery and for a protective order was met with strong opposition from the plaintiff's legal team. The plaintiff's attorney argued that there is no active criminal investigation related to the hit-and-run incident central to the civil case, emphasizing that the head investigating officer, Officer Anthony Sims, has provided a sworn statement confirming this.

The attorney highlighted that there has been no arrest or prosecution referral concerning the incident, questioning the necessity of halting civil proceedings based on a non-existent criminal investigation. They urged the court to reject the defendants' motion, asserting that the burden of proof lies with the defendants to demonstrate a valid reason for the stay, which they believe has not been met.

Additionally, the plaintiff's team filed a motion to compel discovery, requesting the court to order the defendants to provide available dates for depositions. They also sought reimbursement for attorney's fees incurred in drafting their response and the motion to compel, indicating readiness to testify about the associated costs.

The court's decision on these motions will significantly impact the progression of the civil case, as the plaintiff seeks to ensure that discovery continues without unnecessary delays.