Lasalle Bank v. Mobile Hotel Properties

Full title: LASALLE BANK N.A. v. MOBILE HOTEL PROPERTIES, LLC, et al

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana

Date published: Jul 12, 2004

Civil Action No. 03-2225 SECTION: E/3 (E.D. La. Jul. 12, 2004)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 03-2225 SECTION: E/3.

July 12, 2004

ORDER AND REASONS

MARCEL LIVAUDAIS, Senior District Judge

The underlying collection matter giving rise to the discovery dispute now before the Court arises out of a loan to Mobile Home Properties, L.L.C. by LaSalle as an assignee of the original lender. The plaintiff has filed an appeal and objections to Magistrate Judge Knowles' denial on June 10, 2004 (r.d. 63) of plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of his order entered June 4, 2004 (r.d. 60) compelling plaintiff to produce to defendants copies of plaintiff's "Business Plans".

Plaintiff asserts that the Business Plans are privileged communications concerning its legal strategies vis-a-vis the defendants. It argues that the Magistrate Judge's denial of its motion for reconsideration was based on a mistake of fact because he mistakenly believed that the Business Plans had been disclosed to a third party, Standard Poor's ("SP") rating agency, in connection with obtaining approval for a loan modification. Defendants argue that, to the contrary, the Business Plans are not privileged for two reasons: (1) deposition testimony of plaintiff's corporate representative was evidence that the Business Plans at issue were not prepared solely in anticipation of litigation but were prepared in the normal course of business; and (2) a letter from a member of plaintiff's Credit Committee to SP dated September 24, 2001, conveyed at least a substantial part of the substance of the Business Plans thereby waiving any privilege.

The district court's review of nondispositive decisions by a magistrate judge is limited to a determination of whether the decision is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A); St. Paul Fire Marine Ins. Co. v. SSA Gulf Terminals, Inc., 2002 WL 31375611 at **1-2 (E.D. La. 2002).

Magistrate Judge Knowles acknowledged in his June 10^th denial of plaintiff's motion for reconsideration that his ruling on June 4^th was based on his "mis-impression" that one of the business plans had been sent to SP with the letter dated September 24, 2001, but that he nevertheless found the argument of counsel, the deposition testimony of Lea Land, and the Credit Committee's September 24^th letter to SP to be persuasive. After careful review of Magistrate Judge Knowles' orders of June 4, 2001 and June 10, 2001, the parties' memoranda and exhibits attached thereto, and the law, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's denial of LaSalle's motion for reconsideration is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law.

Accordingly, LaSalle's appeal and objections to Magistrate Judge Knowles' denial of LaSalle's motion for reconsideration is OVERRULED.