Costa v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
Costa v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
| Case Date: | 04/05/2018 |
| Citation: | Costa v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., Case No: 6:17-cv-714-Orl-40TBS, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58110 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 5, 2018) |
| Court Type: | Federal District |
| Court: | Middle District of Florida (M.D. Fla.) |
| Judge: | Federal Magistrate Judge: Thomas B. Smith |
| Rule(s): | Rule 26; Rule 45 |
| Issues: | Defendant moved to compel production of documents from a non-party. Non-party objected to the subpoenaed documents on grounds that the documents were protected by attorney-client privilege and work product privilege, and the production of the documents would be unduly burdensome. |
| Resolution: | The Court denied Defendant’s motion to compel. The Court found no merit in Defendant’s attorney-client and work product objections, but found that the motion to compel was overbroad and imposed an undue burden on non-party Beachside Legal Services. |
| Relevant Documents: | Defendant’s Motion to Compel Production of Documents (Doc. 55) Non-Party’s Objection and Response to Motion to Compel Production of Documents (Doc. 59) Motion to Overrule Non-Parties’ Objections to Compel Production (Doc. 60) Non-Party’s Response to Motion to Overrule Non-Parties’ Objection to Motion to Compel (Doc. 61) |
| E-Discovery Issues: | Motion to Compel |
| E-discovery Tags: | Attorney-Client, Non-Party Discovery, Possession or Control, Privilege, Proportionality, Relevancy, Work Product |
Deprecated: Theme without comments.php is deprecated since version 3.0.0 with no alternative available. Please include a comments.php template in your theme. in /h/cnswww-ediscovery.law/ediscovery.law.ufl.edu/htdocs/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5516