From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Robbins v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 22, 2008
No. CIV S-06-2926 RRB DAD (E.D. Cal. Jan. 22, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-2926 RRB DAD.

January 22, 2008


ORDER


This matter came before the court on January 18, 2008, for hearing on plaintiff's motion to compel further discovery responses and for sanctions. Stacy Lynn Roberts appeared on behalf of plaintiff. Brian Roger Davis appeared on behalf of defendant.

The court having considered all written materials submitted in connection with the motion, and having heard oral argument from the parties, for the reasons stated on the record, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's November 27, 2007 motion to compel further discovery responses is granted in part and denied in part.

2. Plaintiff's motion to compel further responses to Special Interrogatory Nos. 1 — 3 and Request for Production of Documents No. 1, seeking information and documents concerning prior similar claims and lawsuits, is denied without prejudice.

3. Defendant shall produce for in camera review all documents not provided to plaintiff in response to plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents Nos. 2 — 4 regarding documents in Crandall, Wade Lowe's possession. The documents shall be delivered to the chambers of the undersigned by January 25, 2008.

4. Plaintiff's motion to compel defendant to produce in electronic file format the documents responsive to plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents Nos. 2 — 4 that have been produced in paper format is denied without prejudice.

5. Plaintiff's motion to compel a further response to plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents No. 6 is granted. Defendant shall produce, from the personnel files of the persons specified in plaintiff's request, for the period including 1995 through 2005, all evaluations, performance reviews, and any documents concerning goals. Each person shall be assigned a number, and each responsive document from that person's file shall be identified by the person's assigned number, so that all documents from a particular personnel file shall bear the same identifying number. Identifying information, including names, addresses, telephone numbers, identification numbers, and signatures, shall be redacted. Responsive documents shall be produced in paper format due to the necessity of redacting them in accordance with this order. Defendant's further response shall be served on plaintiff on or before February 4, 2008.

6. Each party's request for sanctions is denied.


Summaries of

Robbins v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 22, 2008
No. CIV S-06-2926 RRB DAD (E.D. Cal. Jan. 22, 2008)
Case details for

Robbins v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

Case Details

Full title:SHARON ROBBINS, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO.…

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

Date published: Jan 22, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-06-2926 RRB DAD (E.D. Cal. Jan. 22, 2008)