What is the standard of discovery in a personal injury action?
The following excerpt is from Chacko v. AT&T Umbrella Benefit Plan No. 3, No. 2:19-cv-1837 JAM DB (E.D. Cal. 2020):
In this regard, the undersigned cannot agree with plaintiff's assertion that "[d]ocuments produced . . . demonstrate the existence of a conflict of interest[.]" (ECF No. 25) at 14.) At oral argument plaintiff essentially argued that discovery was necessary to determine if a conflict existed. If that were the standard, however, discovery would always be permissible. That is not to say that discovery is never permissible. However, plaintiff has presented nothing to show even the appearance of a conflict of interest which would justify conflict-of-interest discovery. See Murphy v. Deloitte & Touche Group Ins. Plan, 619 F.3d 1151, 1163 (10th Cir. 2010) ("The party moving to supplement the record or engage in extra-record discovery bears the burden of showing its propriety.").
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
