Horowitch v. Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc. » The Florida E-Discovery Case Law Database » Levin College of Law » University of Florida

Horowitch v. Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc.

Horowitch v. Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc.

Case Date: 04/23/2007
Citation: Horowitch v. Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc., No. 6:06-CV-1703-Orl-19JGG, 2007 WL 1192401 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 23, 2007)
Court Type: Federal District
Court: Middle District of Florida (M.D. Fla.)
Judge: Federal Magistrate Judge: James G. Glazebrook
Rule(s): Rule 26; Rule 33; Rule 34
Issues:

Plaintiff moved to compel documents and further answers to interrogatories.

Resolution:

The Court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff’s motion to compel. To the extent Defendant objected based on general assertions of privilege and vagueness/overbreadth, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to compel, as Defendant did not specifically object and create a privilege log. However, the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of some documents, because Plaintiff did not make a good faith effort to communicate with opposing counsel and resolve the dispute beforehand.

Relevant Documents:

Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel (Doc. 34)

Exhibit B to Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel (Doc. 34-3) 

Exhibit C to Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel (Doc.  34-4) 

Defendant’s Response in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel (Doc. 44)

Order on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel (Doc. 47) 

E-Discovery Issues: Motion to Compel
E-discovery Tags: Attorney-Client, Communication/Cooperation, Possession or Control, Privilege, Relevancy, Work Product

Published: April 9th, 2018

Category: Uncategorized


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

Comments are closed.