Opinion
No. 01 C 268
November 9, 2001
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In a paper-intensive case mistakes may well happen, and one happened here. Defendant inadvertently failed to respond to plaintiffs' Second Request to Admit and far more than 30 days has passed. It moves to withdraw the resulting admissions. That motion is granted. Withdrawal will facilitate the parties' ability to reach the truth and it will not unduly prejudice plaintiffs.
We direct that defendant fully and fairly respond to the requests within 21 days.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
A protracted discovery dispute has been reduced to a dispute over 23 pages of documents. Actually, it involves less than that, as it involves seven identical or virtually identical copies of two pages, and two identical electronic messages. Defendant submitted those and related documents to the court for an in camera examination. It asks for a protective order. Plaintiffs had earlier countered with a motion. for a rule to show cause which has largely been overtaken by events. We grant the motion for a protective order and deny the motion for a rule to show cause. The documents shall be filed under seal.
The 23 documents are, indeed, protected as attorney work product. Plaintiffs want to know defendant's negotiation position, and they will learn that when defendant makes an offer. But when? We believe that plaintiffs' real concern — and it is a legitimate concern — is that time is passing during which, the parties apparently agree, defendant owes the plaintiffs a considerable amount of money. The litigation strategy was set last spring. It is time to implement that strategy by a specific offer and an explanation of why the offer is what it is.