131 results for 'cat:"Employment" AND cat:"Discovery"'.
J. Rodriguez denies the city's motion for a protective order restricting the former commander from questioning witnesses about certain documents during upcoming depositions and excluding those documents from the commander's employment discrimination lawsuit. The documents, which include emails from city employees relating to various internal investigations, were sent to the former commander anonymously. The city has not established that these documents were ever in the city's possession or that they were illegally intercepted. Nor has the city provided any declarations to support assertions of attorney-client privilege.
Court: USDC Southern District of California, Judge: Rodriguez, Filed On: May 10, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv526, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: discovery, employment Discrimination
J. Sammartino denies in part Alaska Airlines' motion in limine in the customer service associate's employment action. The airline seeks to exclude the circumstances of another employee's termination, but only provides ill-defined representations and abstract arguments to support its request, which are insufficient. However, previously undisclosed witnesses who were only briefly mentioned during discovery will be excluded from testifying at trial.
Court: USDC Southern District of California, Judge: Sammartino, Filed On: May 9, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv203, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, 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. Cole partially grants a former electronics salesman’s motion to compel his former employer, an electronics retailer, to produce a privilege log. The former electronic salesman claims his employer fired him over his disability and use of FMLA leave, and seeks documents that could corroborate his allegations of discrimination. The court instead asks the parties to confer “in good faith,” and reach a “negotiated result” over discovery within the next two weeks.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Cole, Filed On: April 3, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv2639, NOS: Family and Medical Leave Act - Labor, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, discovery, employment Discrimination
J. Nalbandian finds the district court properly denied a former truck driver’s motion asking for irrelevant discovery. The driver alleged a trucking company defamed him by releasing his employment records to prospective employers through a third-party consumer credit reporting company. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Nalbandian, Filed On: April 2, 2024, Case #: 23-5568, Categories: employment, discovery
J. DeGravells denies a second request for summary judgment to Walmart, finding a shopper shows a genuine issue of material fact as to the store’s knowledge of a liquid in an aisle prior to her slip and fall accident. An employee-witness's contradictory statements, including whether the woman slipped on water or a reddish liquid resembling “congealed meat juice,” must be considered by a jury.
Court: USDC Middle District of Louisiana, Judge: DeGravelles, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv488-, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: employment, Jury, discovery
J. Gibbons finds the lower court properly enforced the subpoena filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Although the notice was sent to the employer's legal counsel and uploaded to the EEOC's online portal, the employer had accepted service of previous subpoenas in this fashion and cannot claim it was not properly served. Additionally, the improper reply date on the subpoena was merely a scrivener's error that did not render the entire document defective and allowed the court to enforce the subpoena. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Gibbons, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 23-1719, Categories: Civil Procedure, employment, discovery
J. Isaac grants in part a transportation company’s motion for a protective order in a suit on negligence claims filed by an employee who was harmed when driving a tractor. For instance, the motion is partly granted as to the specified topic regarding the company's answers to interrogatories, and it is fully granted as to the topic regarding the deposition testimony of the defendant driver.
Court: USDC Southern District of Mississippi , Judge: Isaac, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv251, NOS: Motor Vehicle - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: employment, Negligence, discovery
J. Valle partially grants the airline's motion to compel in the flight attendant's case alleging that she was fired for taking medical leave. The flight attendant must serve amended responses to two of three disputed interrogatories. One, seeking medical records, is not precluded by physician-patient or psychotherapist-patient privilege; nor is another, seeking identification of health care practitioners. A document request for executed HIPAA releases for each health care practitioner is denied, since no controlling authority allows courts to compel parties to execute HIPAA releases.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Valle, Filed On: March 22, 2024, Case #: 0:22cv61651, NOS: Family and Medical Leave Act - Labor, Categories: employment, discovery
J. Wicks grants in part a motion to compel and orders a drywall and carpentry subcontractor to produce historical data listing the number of employees enrolled on its payroll between Jan. 1, 1994 to Jan. 3, 2017, which will help bolster a Black receptionist’s claim that she could have performed her duties in 20 hours as an accommodation for injuries that she suffered in a car accident. The court finds that the information requested is sufficiently targeted and will not pose an undue burden on her employer.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Wicks, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv4044, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: discovery, employment Discrimination
J. Hummel orders New York State’s Department of Environmental Conservation to produce requested documents in an employment discrimination lawsuit. The litigant seeks documentation regarding the demotion and subsequent promotion an environmental department officer who was the subject of a sexual harassment complaint. The litigant in this case alleges he was denied a promotion to be the director of law enforcement due to reverse racism, while the department argues the decision to deny him the position was in part based on his involvement in the officer’s promotion, which they claimed showed a lapse in judgment.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: Hummel, Filed On: March 14, 2024, Case #: 1:20cv106, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, discovery, employment Discrimination
J. Horan grants, in part, a former employee's motion to compel in his age discrimination action against Google. Google failed to comply with a previous court order requiring it to submit certain documents and testimony regarding directors within the Google Cloud organization, and must do so now.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Horan, Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv2281, NOS: Labor/Management Relations - Labor, Categories: Communications, discovery, employment Discrimination
J. Hurwitz finds that the district court properly dismissed an employee's discrimination claims because of "intentional spoliation of electronically stored information" by the employee. Ample circumstantial evidence showed that the employee acted willfully, and the district court properly relied on an inference that her deletion of text messages with co-workers and her coordination with witnesses to delete messages was prejudicial to the employer. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Hurwitz, Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: 22-16465, Categories: employment, discovery
J. Godbey grants, in part, an insurer's motion for a protective order against discovery requests in an employee's action seeking coverage of a judgment he won against his former employer under the employer's insurance policy. Only two production requests are entitled to protection, as they seek information pertaining to coverage of unrelated third parties.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Godbey, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv769, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: employment, Insurance, discovery
J. Jones grants a former employee’s motion for a protective order in this employment dispute brought against the city and its light department regarding religious discrimination. The employee alleges she was fired after her supervisor refused to accommodate religious exemption requests for the state’s Covid-19 vaccine requirement. The city then requested school records of the employee’s minor child, and she argues the records are beyond the scope of litigation and the minor child’s privacy should be protected. Therefore, the parties shall redact the child’s name and birthdate and use initials only. The court grants the city’s motion to compel for the former employee to answer each deficient interrogatory and request for production.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Jones, Filed On: March 1, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv1668, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Privacy, discovery, employment Discrimination
J. Brailsford denies the city's motion for protective order and grants in part an employee's motion to compel the production of documents in an employment dispute. The employee alleges that she was fired after requesting accommodations of working from home while recovering from her long-haul Covid-19 symptoms. The city should produce a privilege log listing documents individually, " describing the document with sufficient particularly to show a privilege applies." The employee will be permitted to reopen certain dispositions and the city will bear the expense. There is no evidence that the employee willfully withheld a spreadsheet and emails.
Court: USDC Idaho, Judge: Brailsford, Filed On: February 27, 2024, Case #: 4:22cv180, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities-Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, discovery, employment Discrimination
J. Wicks denies in part a motion for a protective order filed in an employment discrimination complaint and directs the mortgage lender to provide documents that it describes as sensitive business information, including its gross-total volume in mortgage sales for its New York branch. The litigants, regional managers who claim they were discriminated against on the basis that they are Italian Americans, seek information related to the company’s decision to restructure, which led to their terminations. The lender fails to explicitly detail how disclosure of this information would harm the company.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Wicks, Filed On: February 21, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv542, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: discovery, Banking / Lending, employment Discrimination