Mealey's Discovery

  • March 11, 2020

    Judge Approves Chicken Plant Inspection As Groundwater Contamination Case Proceeds

    GEORGETOWN, Del. — A Delaware judge on March 9 approved a couple’s request for an inspection of a chicken processing plant which they say has contaminated the local groundwater with wastewater, as discovery continues in the case (Gary and Anna-Marie Cuppels, et al. v. Mountaire Corporation, et al., No. S18C-06-009 ESB, Del. Super., Sussex Co.).

  • March 11, 2020

    Nursing Home Fraud Suit Attorney Declares No Breach Of Protective Order

    SANTA ANA, Calif. — After a senior living chain claimed that an attorney representing the plaintiffs suing it for fraud in a putative class action had violated a discovery protective order, the attorney filed a declaration in California on March 2, asserting that she had not engaged in any such violations (Audrey Heredia, et al. v. Sunrise Senior Living LLC, et al., No. 8:18-cv-01974, C.D. Calif.).

  • March 11, 2020

    Attorney-Client, Marital Privilege Assertions Overruled In Bitcoin Ownership Row

    WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — The defendant in a dispute over the ownership of billions of dollars’ worth of bitcoin assets must produce 11,000 documents that he has withheld from discovery, a Florida federal magistrate judge ruled March 9, overruling the defendant’s objections under the marital and attorney-client privileges (Ira Kleiman, et al. v. Craig Wright, No. 9:18-cv-80176, S.D. Fla., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40195).

  • March 10, 2020

    Supreme Court Vacates Discovery Order Stay In Drug Price-Fixing MDL

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — One week after Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. granted an application by a group of pharmaceutical firms to stay a portion of a trial court’s discovery order in a multidistrict price-fixing litigation, the full U.S. Supreme Court on March 6 denied the application and vacated the justice’s order, allowing discovery to continue despite the drug companies’ assertion that the discovery order improperly requires them to produce materials before they have the opportunity to object on the basis of relevance or responsiveness in violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) (Actavis Holdco Inc., et al. v. Connecticut, et al., No. 19-1010, U.S. Sup., 2020 U.S. LEXIS 1515).

  • March 09, 2020

    Bitcoin Dispute Defendant Opposes Letter Rogatory On British Blockchain Firm

    WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — A request by the plaintiffs in a bitcoin ownership dispute to serve a letter rogatory on a nonparty British blockchain company “is untimely and prejudicial,” the defendant bitcoin mogul tells a Florida federal court in a March 6 opposition brief, noting that the discovery cutoff date is “a mere month and a half away” (Ira Kleiman, et al. v. Craig Wright, No. 9:18-cv-80176, S.D. Fla.).

  • March 06, 2020

    Dismissal Denied In Suit Over COBRA; Class Discovery Halted

    TAMPA, Fla. — A federal judge in Florida on March 3 denied an employer’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit alleging that former employees lost their medical benefits due to insufficient Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) notice in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and permitted discovery on the two named plaintiffs’ claims to proceed but denied class discovery, writing that “[c]lass issues will be addressed on a later schedule” (Milton Robles, et al. v. Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC, No. 19-2713, M.D. Fla., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36385).

  • March 06, 2020

    Judge Won’t Quash Discovery Of Doe’s Identity In File-Sharing Copyright Suit

    GREENBELT, Md. — A John Doe defendant who is accused of sharing copyrighted adult films online cannot escape a subpoena that will provide his identity to the plaintiff movie studio, a Maryland federal judge ruled Feb. 25, finding no expectation of privacy in the requested information and denying the plaintiff’s motion to quash the subpoena (Strike 3 Holdings LLC v. John Doe, No. 3:19-cv-00396, D. Md.).

  • March 05, 2020

    Limited Discovery Allowed On Dual-Role Conflict Of Interest In Disability Case

    TOPEKA, Kan. — A federal magistrate judge in Kansas on Feb. 28 granted a disability claimant’s motion for discovery to determine whether her insurer’s dual role as plan administrator and payer affected its decision to deny her long-term disability (LTD) benefits, finding that the claimant met her burden to prove that limited discovery on the issue is appropriate (Jodie L. Bribiesca v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, No. 19-1339, D. Kan., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34929).

  • March 05, 2020

    NFL Player, Disability Plan Dispute Discovery Of Doctors’ Pay In Coverage Suit

    SAN FRANCISCO — In a Feb. 11 joint discovery letter brief, a former National Football League (NFL) player and an NFL benefits plan argue over whether the player is entitled to conduct discovery from physicians used by the plan to determine whether the doctors had a financial incentive to recommend denial of disability benefits (Charles Dimry v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan, et al., No. 3:19-cv-05360, N.D. Calif.).

  • March 04, 2020

    Judge: Asbestos Widow May Dig Into French Company’s New York Connections

    NEW YORK — A widow is entitled to jurisdictional discovery into whether a French company’s contacts with New York give the state jurisdiction over her asbestos case, a federal judge held March 3 (Elodie Paroni, et al. V. Alstom SA, et al., No. 19-1034, S.D. N.Y., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36610).

  • March 04, 2020

    Subpoena To Unmask Jehovah’s Witness Reddit User Over Copyright Issues Quashed

    SAN FRANCISCO — The identity of an anonymous Jehovah’s Witness user of Reddit Inc. can remain unknown, a California federal judge ruled March 2, finding that his posting of two purportedly copyrighted items constituted fair use in the form of criticism and commentary, leading the judge to grant the user’s motion to quash a subpoena to identify him for the purpose of pursuing copyright infringement claims (In re DMCA Subpoena to Reddit Inc., No. 3:19-mc-80005, N.D. Calif.).

  • March 04, 2020

    Boston Scientific Sanctioned For Discovery Violations In Whistleblower Case

    MINNEAPOLIS — A Minnesota federal magistrate judge on Feb. 28 sanctioned Boston Scientific Corp. for prejudicing and harming a whistleblower by not disclosing relevant witnesses in a heart defibrillator case until the last day of discovery (United States, ex rel. Steven Higgins v. Boston Scientific Corporation, No. 11-2453, D. Minn., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34459).

  • March 04, 2020

    Judge Stays Discovery Pending Ruling On Insured’s Summary Judgment Motion

    SEATTLE — A federal judge in Washington on Feb. 20 granted an insured’s motion for a protective order in a declaratory judgment action brought against it by two insurance companies, holding that the insured’s motion for summary judgment based on the bad faith of the insurers, as well as their lack of standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution, can be decided without additional discovery (Travelers Property Casualty Company of America, et al. v. H.D. Fowler Co., et al., No. C19-1050-JCC, W.D. Wash., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29306).

  • March 03, 2020

    Limited Monetary Sanctions Granted Over Discovery Dispute In Trade Secrets Suit

    CHICAGO — A federal magistrate judge in Illinois on Feb. 28 ruled that defendants in a breach of contract and trade secret misappropriation lawsuit brought by a stored energy solutions provider are entitled to limited monetary sanctions covering half of the reasonable attorney fees incurred by the defendants as a result of the plaintiff’s failure to properly collect documents and its issuance of misleading responses to other discovery requests (LiiON LLC v. Vertiv Group Corp., et al., No. 18-6133, N.D. Ill.).

  • March 03, 2020

    Justice Alito Stays Discovery Order In Generic Drug Price-Fixing MDL

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — On Feb. 28, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. granted an application by a group of pharmaceutical firm defendants to stay a portion of a trial court’s discovery order in a multidistrict price-fixing litigation to allow for the U.S. Supreme Court’s resolution of the firms’ petition for certiorari, in which they argue that the order improperly requires them to produce materials before they have the opportunity to object on the basis of relevance or responsiveness in violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) (Actavis Holdco Inc., et al. v. Connecticut, et al., No. 19-1010, U.S. Sup., 2020 U.S. LEXIS 1369).

  • March 03, 2020

    Allergen Wants Biocell Breast Implant Plaintiffs To Identify Themselves

    NEWARK, N.J. — Allergan Inc. on Feb. 28 asked the Biocell breast implant multidistrict litigation court to prohibit plaintiffs from filing anonymous pleadings under names such as “Jane Doe” and initials (In Re:  Allergen Biocell Textures Breast Implant Product Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2921, No. 19-mn-2921, D. N.J.).

  • March 02, 2020

    Facebook, Plaintiffs Argue Over Custodians, Discovery Timeliness In Privacy Suit

    SAN FRANCISCO — In respective case management statements filed in California federal court on Feb. 27, Facebook Inc. and a putative class suing it over the Cambridge Analytica data-sharing incident blame each other for delays in the discovery process, arguing about such matters as search terms, depositions and the appropriate number of custodians (In re Facebook Inc., Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation, No. 3:18-md-02843, N.D. Calif.).

  • February 28, 2020

    Arizona Disability Claimant Denied Discovery Into Alleged Conflicts Of Interest

    PHOENIX — A federal judge in Arizona on Feb. 25 denied a disability claimant’s request for discovery to supplement the administrative record in her suit alleging that her claim for long-term disability (LTD) was wrongfully denied, finding that she failed to demonstrate that the insurer’s alleged structural conflict of interest demands additional discovery or that information she sought about its medical reviewers’ alleged conflicts would be necessary for the court to conduct a de novo review (Leslie DeMarco v. Life Insurance Company of North America, et al., No. CV-19-02385, D. Ariz., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31723).

  • February 18, 2020

    Oracle:  Attorney-Client Privilege Wrongly Applied To Rimini Technical Documents

    LAS VEGAS — More than a year after it was granted an injunction in a long-running software copyright dispute with Rimini Street Inc., Oracle USA Inc. filed an objection to a Nevada federal magistrate judge’s discovery ruling on Feb. 12, asserting that the defendant is using the attorney-client privilege to shield continued infringement (Oracle USA Inc., et al. v. Rimini Street Inc., et al., No. 2:10-cv-00106, D. Nev.).

  • February 14, 2020

    Facebook, Twitter Seek Supreme Court Guidance Over SCA Subpoena Responses

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — On Feb. 7, Facebook Inc. and Twitter Inc. filed a petition for certiorari asking the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether subpoenas requiring the disclosure of users’ nonpublic social media account contents, which they say violate the Stored Communications Act (SCA), are constitutionally permissible (Facebook Inc., et al. v. The Superior Court of San Francisco County, et al., No. 19-1006, U.S. Sup.).

Can't find the article you're looking for? Click here to search the Mealey's Discovery archive.