No Faith in the Moral Standards of the Players as a Group - Page 119

Icky Thump · 05-17-2016, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Icky, here's how my world is- A produces 500000 pages of crap. All marked eyes only. I can ask for lowering and they will ignore, and then I can file a motion and maybe a judge will rule in 6 months, but probably not. A has never claimed confidentiality re. B, but the question has never been asked. And I just realized B is who i need to talk to. Across the 500000 documents are companies A-Z. I did not ask for B until noe.

Sounds like A threw B under the bus. I would then depose B and use all of the documents. Betcha A doesn't utter a peep.

Not Bob · 05-17-2016, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

Sounds like A threw B under the bus. I would then depose B and use all of the documents. Betcha A doesn't utter a peep.

Agreed. And counsel for A will have a tough time arguing that emails that B sent to A and received from A can't be shown to B because of the protective order.

I'd first send a letter to A's counsel about her improper blanket "attorney eye's only" designation of 5000 pages, but unless you have a judge who you know will ding you and not the other side, go for it.

Lawtalkers - Imaginary Friends sharing legal advice since 2003.

Sidd Finch · 05-17-2016, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Legal question-

Okay company A produces docs as eye's only under a protective order. One is from company B to company A. One is an email from A's CEO to B's CEO. If I can't get the documents from B do I have the right to use them in a dep of B and a deep of B's CEO? I've seen protective orders that say such is fine but this one doesn't address it.

It sounds like your protective order does NOT say that you can show documents to any person who sent, received, or reviewed them in the ordinary course of business outside the litigation. Bummer.

Here's what I would do: If it's addressed to B's CEO and B itself is not a party, I probably would not use the document in a deposition of just anyone at B. But in a deposition of B's CEO, I would expect to use it. I'd ask some non-leading questions about it, before showing him the document (did you get an email from A about x? On around x date? What do you recall about that email? Blah blah blah).

Then I would give the document to A's lawyer (I'm assuming A is the opposing party and will be there), and ask if he agrees that you can show the document to the witness, since the document was originally addressed to the witness. You can pitch it as requesting a limited exception to the protective order (i.e., deal with this on a case-by-case basis), or as dealing with an obvious flaw in the protective order (agreeing that the parties can always show dox to people who received or sent them in the first place). Which is better really depends on your situation.

If A refuses, make clear that you intend to recall the witness and request sanctions for an over-designation under the protective order. No one wants to be the dickhead arguing to the judge that he properly refused to let you show a document to the original addressee of that document.

Or, you could just ask B's CEO to produce the document in your depo notice.

Hank Chinaski · 05-17-2016, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

It sounds like your protective order does NOT say that you can show documents to any person who sent, received, or reviewed them in the ordinary course of business outside the litigation. Bummer.

Here's what I would do: If it's addressed to B's CEO and B itself is not a party, I probably would not use the document in a deposition of just anyone at B. But in a deposition of B's CEO, I would expect to use it. I'd ask some non-leading questions about it, before showing him the document (did you get an email from A about x? On around x date? What do you recall about that email? Blah blah blah).

Then I would give the document to A's lawyer (I'm assuming A is the opposing party and will be there), and ask if he agrees that you can show the document to the witness, since the document was originally addressed to the witness. You can pitch it as requesting a limited exception to the protective order (i.e., deal with this on a case-by-case basis), or as dealing with an obvious flaw in the protective order (agreeing that the parties can always show dox to people who received or sent them in the first place). Which is better really depends on your situation.

If A refuses, make clear that you intend to recall the witness and request sanctions for an over-designation under the protective order. No one wants to be the dickhead arguing to the judge that he properly refused to let you show a document to the original addressee of that document.

Or, you could just ask B's CEO to produce the document in your depo notice.

did ask B to produce, and if it does this becomes a non-issue.

Sidd Finch · 05-17-2016, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

did ask B to produce, and if it does this becomes a non-issue.

And makes it the dullest real-world hypo we've been presented with to date.

ThurgreedMarshall · 05-17-2016, 05:32 PM

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=4098

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=4099

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=4100

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=4101

TM

Not Bob · 05-17-2016, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

And makes it the dullest real-world hypo we've been presented with to date.

Oh, come on - everyone will mainly agree that I am mostly correct when I say that discussing a problem another lawyer is having in one of their cases is far more interesting than dealing with the issues in out own cases. I like our occasional series "HankHypos." (Alternate title: "Help a Hanker Out!")

Plus, didn't you notice that I made you a character -- the CEO of Company B? No? Huh.

ThurgreedMarshall · 05-18-2016, 04:05 PM

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=4102

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=4103

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=4104

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=4105

TM

Sidd Finch · 05-18-2016, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Bob

Plus, didn't you notice that I made you a character -- the CEO of Company B? No? Huh.

I skipped everyone else's "here's my advice" posts. Why would I listen to you guys?

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy · 05-18-2016, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

I skipped everyone else's "here's my advice" posts. Why would I listen to you guys?

My recommendation was that he hire you.

Hank Chinaski · 05-18-2016, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

And makes it the dullest real-world hypo we've been presented with to date.

this is a case full of the biggest crooks I've ever seen. They do nothing without being forced. the odds of B producing, and producing the few documents I need, are less than 50%. I wrote A's counsel and said i assume they have no objection but if they do I need to know by tomorrow so we can get the Judge involved. The best advice here was no way he wants to bother the judge with this one.