Matches in SCALES for { <scales/DocketEntry/med;;2:17-cv-00463_de63> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 5 of
5
with 100 items per page.
- med;;2:17-cv-00463_de63 RegisterActionDate "2019-08-23" @default.
- med;;2:17-cv-00463_de63 RegisterActionDescriptionText "ORDER re 46 Request for a Hearing Regarding a Discovery Dispute filed by 990B0CB. On August 21, 2019, I held a telephonic discovery hearing with Attorneys Hallett for the plaintiffs, Bouchard for the Jensen Baird defendants, Brogan for defendant 990B0CB, and Glenn Israel for non-parties Bernstein Shur and J. Colby Wallace, Esq. The defendants raised three issues: that (i) non-party witnesses Attorney Wallace and Bernstein Shur had asserted an attorney-client privilege on behalf of their former client, non-party Susan 1BA1D8E, which the defendants contend Dr. 1BA1D8E has waived, (ii) Bernstein Shur had objected to the production of Dr. 1BA1D8E file on the ground of undue burden and expense, and (iii) both Dr. 1BA1D8E and Bernstein Shur had objected to any discovery regarding the terms and subject matter of any settlement agreement between them on the grounds of confidentiality and relevance. During the hearing, Attorney Israel raised a fourth issue: that Bernstein Shur objected to defendant 990B0CB request for production of the so-called "Storage Media." After hearing argument, (i) as to the first issue, the parties requested no further briefing, and I stated that I would rule as quickly as possible following review of the extensive documentation provided, (ii) as to the second issue, I DIRECTED that counsel for the defendants and the Bernstein Shur non-parties further meet and confer, with a view to ascertaining whether files presently in the custody of Attorney Bouchard do, in fact, represent the entirety of Dr. 1BA1D8E Bernstein Shur "client file," and, if not, whether the defendants can agree to pay Bernstein Shur for the reasonable cost of recreating that client file, and (iii) the third issue was MOOTED by Attorney Brogan's withdrawal of the point, without prejudice to its renewal on notice to the court and all counsel. The fourth issue was MOOTED by Attorney Brogan's representation that his client does not seek review of the Storage Media but, rather, the opportunity to view those materials physically, to which Attorney Israel did not object. By MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOHN H. RICH III. (RICH III, JOHN) (Entered: 08/23/2019)" @default.
- med;;2:17-cv-00463_de63 AdministrativeID "53" @default.
- med;;2:17-cv-00463_de63 hasJudgeReference SJ003794 @default.
- med;;2:17-cv-00463_de63 hasReferenceToOtherEntry med;;2:17-cv-00463_de56 @default.