From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Konyn v. Lake Superior & Ishpeming R.R. Co.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION
Feb 3, 2012
Case No. 2:11-cv-51 (W.D. Mich. Feb. 3, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. 2:11-cv-51

02-03-2012

JEFFREY KONYN, Plaintiff(s), v. LAKE SUPERIOR & ISHPEMING RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant(s).


HON. GORDON J. QUIST


OPINION AND ORDER

On January 31, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion for protective order relative to settlement discussions with Vanenkevort Tug & Barge, Inc. (docket #52). On February 3, 2012, defendant filed its response to plaintiff's motion for protective order (docket #59). Oral arguments were presented to the court on February 3, 2012. For the reasons stated on the record and as set forth below, plaintiff's motion is granted in part and denied in part.

Defendant seeks discovery of settlement discussions between plaintiff and his employer, the "empty-chair" non-party Vanenkevort Tug and Barge, Inc. The Sixth Circuit decision in Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company v. Chiles Power Supply, Inc., 332 F. 3d 976 (6th Cir. 2003) provides substantial guidance on the question presented. Defendant will not be permitted to discover any information protected by the attorney client privilege or the spousal privilege. Conversations between plaintiff or plaintiff's counsel and Vanenkevort regarding negotiation of a settlement of claims plaintiff may have against Vanenkevort are protected from disclosure. See Goodyear Tire; Grant, Konvalinka & Harrison v. USA, 2008 WL 4865571 (E.D. Tenn.). See also Software Tree, LLC v. Red Hat, Inc., et al, 2010 WL 2788202 (E.D. Tex.), copies of which are attached.

Defense counsel indicated at the oral argument he was not seeking to discover such information.
--------

Plaintiff is under a continuing duty to notify defendant if a settlement agreement is reached with Vanenkevort. Thereafter, defendant will be permitted to seek an order from this court seeking production of the agreement. For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff's motion for protective order relative to settlement discussions with Vanenkevort Tug & Barge, Inc., docket #52, is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_________

TIMOTHY P. GREELEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Konyn v. Lake Superior & Ishpeming R.R. Co.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION
Feb 3, 2012
Case No. 2:11-cv-51 (W.D. Mich. Feb. 3, 2012)
Case details for

Konyn v. Lake Superior & Ishpeming R.R. Co.

Case Details

Full title:JEFFREY KONYN, Plaintiff(s), v. LAKE SUPERIOR & ISHPEMING RAILROAD…

Court:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Feb 3, 2012

Citations

Case No. 2:11-cv-51 (W.D. Mich. Feb. 3, 2012)