15 results for 'cat:"Defamation" AND cat:"Discovery"'.
J. Docherty denies the pillow magnate and his company's motion to reconsider an order on their earlier motion to compel, partially grants their separate motion to compel, and grants their motion to amend the scheduling order in the voting machine company's suit against them alleging that they made defamatory claims in disputing the results of the 2020 presidential election. The original ruling on the earlier motion to compel was not in error, and the motion for reconsideration is not properly before the court. The motion to compel is timely as to four of its requests for production, but not for two others, and of the four timely-challenged requests, the voting machine company must supplement its disclosures for one.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Docherty, Filed On: April 15, 2024, Case #: 0:22cv98, NOS: Assault, Libel, & Slander - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Elections, defamation, discovery
J. Conner grants pet retailer Chewy a writ of certiorari after the trial court denied a protective order to prevent deposition of its CEO in claims alleging corporate libel and defamation because evidence does not indicate the CEO possesses personal, unique information pertinent to litigation.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Conner, Filed On: April 3, 2024, Case #: 4D2023-2967, Categories: defamation, discovery
J. Ecker finds the lower court's order granting the police officer's request for a bill of discovery does not become a final judgment until the parties agree on the scope of the discovery order related to IP addresses of internet commenters; therefore, this court lacks jurisdiction over the blog operator's appeal, which must be dismissed.
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court, Judge: Ecker, Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: SC20699, Categories: defamation, Jurisdiction, discovery
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly ordered the voting machine maker to produce redacted text messages related to the deletion of previous messages. However, the majority of the subject text messages are protected from disclosure as they discussed trial preparation and Fox has not demonstrated a substantial need for the text messages. Affirmed in part.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: 00603, Categories: defamation, discovery, Privilege
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. Proctor grants a medical trust’s motion for issuance of a letter or request pursuant to the Hague Convention to permit evidence from Cheyne Capital, of the United Kingdom, related to allegations of defamation published by a research company. The court finds the letter of request falls within the discovery and comity considerations for the requested discovery. The court overrules the research company’s objections to produce the discovery and orders the communications to be produced to a protective order. The court also overrules, in part, the medical trust’s objections related to a bail out loan in lieu of rent and other financial obligations owed.
Court: USDC Northern District of Alabama , Judge: Proctor, Filed On: January 12, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv408, NOS: Assault, Libel, & Slander - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: defamation, discovery
J. Hollander grants a marketing company’s motion to reopen discovery to conduct a deposition of a former employee in this employment dispute of the severance agreement being forged. The company alleges good cause to conduct the deposition due to the fact that the former employee had the opportunity to depose the company’s chief executive officer. The former employee’s motion for sanctions is denied.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Hollander, Filed On: December 1, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv309, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Employment, defamation, discovery
J. Cheesbro partially grants a doctor's motion to compel discovery and production of documents in a defamation action arising after a media company aired four shows in September 2020 which contained allegedly false statements about the doctor related to gynecological care of ICE detainees. The media company is ordered to produce documents in response to three requests related to scripts referencing the doctor or allegations of inappropriate gynecological medical care of detainees, as well as internal and external communications involving 23 individuals. The company is not obligated to produce scripts and draft scripts created after Sept. 17, 2020 because they are not relevant to the inquiry as to actual malice.
Court: USDC Southern District of Georgia, Judge: Cheesbro, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 5:21cv56, NOS: Assault, Libel, & Slander - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: defamation, discovery
J. Docherty grants the voting machine company's motion to compel discovery and partially grants the pillow maker's motion to compel. The voting machine company's motion, which seeks discovery regarding the pillow maker's financial situation to support its theory that he was motivated to defame the company by financial gain and its claim for punitive damages, is based on plausibly pleaded claims and relevant to its claim of actual malice. The pillow maker's motion, meanwhile, is successful as to the company's initial disclosures, and the company shall provide an estimate of its claimed economic and punitive damages. It is also successful as regarding an interrogatory seeking an itemized list of all damages being claimed. It is also ordered to supplement its responses to a number of other interrogatories.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Docherty, Filed On: October 19, 2023, Case #: 0:22cv98, NOS: Assault, Libel, & Slander - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: defamation, discovery
J. Docherty partially grants the voting machine company's motion to compel and denies the pillow magnate and his company's motion to compel in a defamation suit brought by the voting machine company alleging that the magnate made a number of false public statements about the company's conduct in the 2020 election. The pillowmakers shall disclose electronic copies of all the programs in which the allegedly defamatory statements are alleged to have been distributed, along with information as to when and how the programs were released and republished. They need not create a log of communications between the pillowmakers and Donald Trump or a number of affiliated organizations, but any preexisting logs must be disclosed. The identities of any pillow-company employees involved in "creating and developing," but not using, promotional codes the magnate offered to the public alongside his statements, must be disclosed, along with revenue amounts from the promotional codes and deals identified by the voting machine company. They shall also explain the magnate's role as his company's CEO and chairman of its board, and shall supplement disclosures to clarify whether they are withholding documents based on an objection. Finally, they are not obligated to produce documents from a parallel lawsuit by a different voting-machine maker that relate only to that competitor, and the voting-machine company need not produce its election technology for the pillowmakers' inspection.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Docherty, Filed On: August 1, 2023, Case #: 0:22cv98, NOS: Assault, Libel, & Slander - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Elections, defamation, discovery