Russell v. Industrial Development Board of Montgomery

Summary

The Alabama Supreme Court considers a petition for a writ of mandamus challenging an order permitting the deposition of an attorney representing the Industrial Development Board of the City of Montgomery. The court addresses the standards governing mandamus review of discovery orders, including attempts to depose opposing counsel, and the scope of permissible discovery under the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure. The underlying litigation concerns alleged breaches of most-favored-nation provisions in land-option agreements connected to the development of a Hyundai manufacturing plant.

Holdings

1. Mandamus was an appropriate means of reviewing the discovery order because the petition presented an exceptional discovery dispute and the IDB lacked an adequate remedy by ordinary appeal.
2. The court declined to adopt the Shelton approach insofar as it requires the party seeking to depose opposing counsel to initially justify the deposition before the opposing party moves for a protective order.
3. The IDB established good cause for a protective order because the information sought from Gallion was available from other sources and the plaintiffs failed to show that Gallion's testimony was crucial to preparation of their cases.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Supreme Court of Alabama could review the trial court's discovery order by mandamus.
2. Whether the trial court exceeded its discretion by denying the IDB's motion for a protective order preventing the plaintiffs from deposing the IDB's attorney.
3. Whether the trial court's rulings permitting videotaping and requiring document production should be disturbed.

Disposition

writ_granted