MINNEAPOLIS — The judge overseeing the National Hockey League (NHL) concussion multidistrict litigation on April 26 said the league will not be able to get most of the documents from the Boston University Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy Center (BU CTE Center) because of the heavy burden it would create on the center to gather all of the documents requested (In re: National Hockey League Players Concussion Injury Litigation, MDL No. 14-2551, D. Minn.).
SYRACUSE, N.Y. — Supporting documents pertaining to transcripts, arbitration filings and expert reports will not be sealed in a breach of contract dispute between an insurer and reinsurer over asbestos coverage, a New York federal judge ruled April 26 (Utica Mutual Insurance Co. v. Munich Reinsurance America Inc., No. 12-cv-00196, Munich Reinsurance America Inc. v. Utica Mutual Insurance Co., No. 13-cv-00743, N.D. N.Y.).
LINCOLN, Neb. — A Nebraska federal judge on March 31 granted and denied in part a motion to compel information and documents concerning a reinsurance agreement and the relationship between a note and the reinsurance agreement (Applied Underwriters Inc. v. Top’s Personnel Inc., No. 15CV90, D. Neb., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49135).
LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A Kentucky federal judge on April 25 granted a disability claimant’s motion to exclude an expert witness rebuttal report filed by a disability insurer after determining that the report was not filed by the deadline established by the court (James H. Pogue v. The Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co., No. 14-598, W.D. Ky., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62227).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A District of Columbia federal judge on April 13 ordered the U.S. Treasury Department to produce 63 documents it has withheld on the basis of the presidential communications privilege in a civil action against the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. (PBGC), saying that the subpoenaed material likely contains evidence directly relevant to issues that are expected to be central to the trial and that the evidence is not available with due diligence elsewhere (U.S. Department of the Treasury v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. v. Dennis Black, et al., No. 12-mc-100, D. D.C.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56598).
CHICAGO — An insurer is compelled to provide notices with its co-insurers and reinsurers under a 1990 insurance policy, an Illinois federal judge ruled March 30, because the notices might reveal admissions from the insurer about the availability of coverage toward the settlement of lawsuits over the use of contaminated blood products (Baxter International Inc. v. AXA Versicherung, No. 11-cv-09131, N.D. Ill., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48607).
SANTA ANA, Calif. — In an April 21 brief in California federal court, Experian Information Solutions Inc. opposes a motion to compel by the plaintiffs in a putative data breach class action, contending that a forensic consultant’s report on the breach constitutes legal advice that is exempt from discovery under attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine (In Re Experian Data Breach Litigation, No. 8:15-cv-01592, C.D. Calif.).
OAKLAND, Calif. — Parties to an Alameda County case have completed briefing a California appeals court on whether late-submitted deposition testimony creates trial issues in a couple’s asbestos action (Keith Turley and Joy Ann Turley v. Familian Corp., No. A149752, Calif. App., 1st Dist.).
AUSTIN, Texas — In an April 21 brief to the Texas Supreme Court, filed in response to a post-oral argument brief by the real parties in interest in a dispute over the discovery submission form for electronically stored information (ESI) in an insurance coverage lawsuit, an insurer argues that a trial court’s requirement that ESI submission be in the form requested by the plaintiffs did not properly balance relevance, needs and burdens under Texas law (In re State Farm Lloyds, No. 15-0903, Texas Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Affirming a trial court’s ruling, a District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on April 21 found an investigative demand served by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) on a college accreditation organization to be unenforceable because it did not comply with the notification requirements of the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA) (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools, No. 16-5174, D.C. Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6966).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In its April 24 order list, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari to the American Civil Liberties Union in the organization’s request for clarification of the standard for when a document becomes an “agency record” that is subject to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests (American Civil Liberties Union, et al. v. Central Intelligence Agency, et al., No. 16-629, U.S. Sup.).
SAN FRANCISCO — In an April 19 ruling, a California federal magistrate judge denied Google Inc.’s motion to quash a warrant, issued under the Stored Communications Act (SCA), for foreign-stored data, concluding that the warrant on California-based Google constituted a domestic application of the statute that does not run afoul of the presumption against extraterritorial application of U.S. laws (In the Matter of the Search of Content That is Stored at Premises Controlled by Google, No. 3:16-mc-80263, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59990).
NEW YORK— An English energy supplier on April 18 filed an ex parte application in a New York federal court, seeking assistance in obtaining certain evidence held by a bank for use in an international arbitration commenced by it in relation to a dispute over the alleged forced taking of power-generating equipment by the Commonwealth of Australia (In re Application of APR Energy Holdings Limited for Judicial Assistance in obtaining Evidence in this District for Use in a Foreign and International Proceeding Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782, No. 1:17-cv-02784, S.D. N.Y.).
TRENTON, N.J. — A New Jersey federal magistrate judge on April 17 denied an insured’s motion for a protective order seeking to strike a subpoena's document request for “irrelevant and privileged” material from nonparty Wells Fargo Insurance Services USA Inc. in a directors and officers liability coverage dispute (Benecard Services Inc. v. Allied World Specialty Insurance Co., et al., No. 15-8593, D. N.J., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57940).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — Transferring discovery disputes to a Pennsylvania federal judge overseeing an underlying misappropriation of trade secrets lawsuit is proper because the judge has requested that all motions challenging subpoenas issued be transferred to him, a federal magistrate judge in California ruled April 12 in granting a company’s motion to transfer discovery disputes against Yahoo! Inc. and Google Inc. (PPG Industries Inc. v. Jiangsu Tie Mao Glass Co. Ltd., Nos. 16-mc-80160 and 16-mc-8016, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56316).
CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa — A fertilizer company’s discovery requests in a subpoena of the owner of a competitor in a misappropriation of trade secrets lawsuit seek irrelevant information and create an undue burden on the owner, a federal magistrate judge in Iowa ruled April 17 in granting the owner’s motion to quash (Nachurs Alpine Solutions Corp., f/k/a Na-Churs Plant Food Co., v. Nutra-Flo Co., et al., No. 15-4015, N.D. Iowa, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58094).
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — A reinsurer told a federal court in Connecticut on April 10 that a declaration of one of its executives in support of a motion for summary judgment should not be stricken because it is not in contradiction of earlier testimony (Travelers Casualty and Surety Company, f/k/a The Aetna Casualty and Surety Company v. Century Indemnity Company as successor to Insurance Company of North America, No. 16-cv-00170, D. Conn.).
COLUMBIA, S.C. — Finding that not all documents are privileged under the South Carolina Holding Company Regulatory Act, a South Carolina federal judge on April 10 declined to quash a subpoena in which a bank accused of mishandling reinsurance funds seeks an insurer’s financial documents from state insurance regulators (Companion Property and Casualty Insurance Co. n/k/a Sussex Insurance Co. v. U.S. Bank National Association v. Redwood Reinsurance Spc. Ltd., et al., No. 15-01300, D. S.C., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54182).
BAY CITY, Mich. — A Michigan federal judge on April 13 directed an Indian tribe’s health care plan administrator to respond to the tribe’s request to file four sealed summary judgment documents on the public record in the tribe’s lawsuit alleging violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan, et al. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, No. 1:16-cv-10317, E.D. Mich., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56562).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Vacating a $2.7 million sanctions award against Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. in a product liability suit, the U.S. Supreme Court on April 18 ruled that such an award must have a causal link to costs incurred by the opposing party that are attributable to the misconduct (Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Leroy Haeger, et al., No. 15-1406, U.S. Sup., 2017 U.S. LEXIS 2613).