Opinion
2023 CW 0711
10-25-2023
THAD R. SMITH v. LESLIE D. SMITH
Leslie D. Smith, applying for supervisory writs, Family Court in and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 210379.
BEFORE: McCLENDON, WELCH, THERIOT, HESTER, AND MILLER, JJ.
WRIT GRANTED WITH ORDER. The portions of the district court's July 13, 2023 judgment that decreed any discovery requests seeking information or documentation in the control of Thad R. Smith after the termination of the community regime on December 15, 2020 to be irrelevant for the purposes of discovery, finding his responses to requests for production of documents satisfactory for this reason and denying the motion to compel discovery filed by Leslie D. Smith as to these requests, are reversed. Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action. La. Code Civ. P. art. 1422. The test of discoverability is whether the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Lehmann v. American Southern Home Ins. Co., 615 So.2d 923, 925 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 617 So.2d 913 (La. 1993). We find the information sought by Leslie D. Smith in her Second Set of Requests for Production is relevant and subject to discovery. The motion to compel is granted as to such requests. This matter is remanded to the district court to provide a reasonable time within which Thad R. Smith must respond to these discovery requests and to consider Leslie Smith's request for an award of attorney's fees and costs in accordance with La. Code Civ. P. art. 1469(4).
Pmc
JEW
MRT
SMM
Hester, J., concurs in part and dissents in part. I agree that Request for Production Nos. 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, and 13 of Ms. Smith's Second Set of Requests for Production of Documents to Mr. Smith are relevant and subject to discovery. Accordingly, I would grant Ms. Smith's motion to compel responses to these discovery requests and remand the matter for consideration of Ms. Smith's request for attorney's fees and costs. However, I would deny Ms. Smith's motion as to the remaining requests.