motion to compel
In this negligence case arising from a car accident, the plaintiff moved to compel the production of daily driving reports.
The court rejected a party’s argument that his opponent’s shortcomings justified his own deficient discovery responses as a “playground tantrum.”
Citing FRCP 34 regarding the form of production, the court ordered a party to re-produce emails in native format rather than as searchable PDFs.
In this fraudulent inducement claim, the magistrate considered the permissible scope of discovery for the parties’ cross-motions to compel.