6 results for 'cat:"Due Process" AND cat:"Discovery"'.
J. Kelley allows in part the motion to access a third party’s mental health records and criminal offender record information of a man granted a new trial after serving approximately 30 years in prison for allegedly raping a 78-year-old woman. The third party is a woman with substance abuse disorder who had a tumultuous intimate relationship with the man, and she had provided testimony that the man confessed of the rape to her. Some of the documents sought are protected by the Public Health Service Act but her “non-communicative mental health records pertaining to her
diagnoses and treatment—are not privileged.”
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Kelley, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: 1:18cv10147, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Evidence, due Process, discovery
J. Silva grants the city’s motion to amend the pretrial order in this employment discrimination suit to identify witnesses presented as those most knowledgeable. The employee has been on notice that a “person most knowledgeable” would be called by the city, and the proposed testimony will not be unexpected. The employee has also named one of the witnesses on the city’s witness list, which further demonstrates a lack of prejudice. There is no evidence that the city seeks to amend in bad faith.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Silva, Filed On: November 3, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv198, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: due Process, discovery, Employment Discrimination
J. Major grants in part the individual's motion to compel discovery in his case accusing the law firm of violating his due process rights while litigating against him in a divorce case by retaining a private judge who was biased in favor of the law firm. The firm must provide documents showing its policies or procedures for screening potential conflicts of interests when choosing cases and private judges. One of the attorneys must also produce all written communications between him and the private judge for a specified time period, other than those in which another attorney was copied.
Court: USDC Southern District of California, Judge: Major, Filed On: October 12, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv437, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: due Process, discovery
[Consolidated.] J. Siler finds the lower court properly denied the property owners' motion for discovery because none of the documents or information requested had any bearing on due process claims regarding the notice given by the city before it demolished several properties deemed public nuisances. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Siler, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 22-3216, Categories: Property, due Process, discovery
J. Baldwin grants the debtor's request to extend discovery in this fair debt collection proceeding. The deposition of the collector's witness was taken just one week prior to the current discovery deadline. It was then that the debtor learned of the collector's recordkeeping practices, its telephone service provider, and the collections caller. Given that the debtor was only recently granted leave to amend, her complaint is anew and the responsive pleadings and defenses are unknown. It would have been impossible to conduct substantial discovery earlier.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Baldwin , Filed On: September 19, 2023, Case #: 3:23cv71, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, due Process, discovery
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Worthen conditionally grants the relator's petition for a writ of mandamus challenging the trial court's granting of the grocery store's motion to quash the deposition of its corporate safety manager in the underlying trip-and-fall suit. The grocery store's argument that the relator is required to notice the deposition of its representative, permitting it to select whom will be deposed, does not align with the cited Texas rule of civil procedure which is meant to merely supplement “the practice whereby the examining party designates the... official to be deposed...” However, the relator has not shown that she lacks another remedy in relation to the denial of her motion to compel discovery. The writ is conditionally granted in part.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Worthen, Filed On: September 13, 2023, Case #: 12-23-00207-CV, Categories: due Process, discovery, Premises Liability