Summary
This order directs the parties to meet and confer regarding defendants’ motion to compel discovery responses. It requires the parties to file a joint list of unresolved discovery issues by January 27, 2026, and schedules a hearing for February 3, 2026. The order also provides guidance concerning proportionality, specificity of discovery requests and objections, privilege logs, and compliance with the meet-and-confer requirement.
Holdings
- The parties must meet and confer in person or by video in good faith as required by E.D. Mich. LR 37.1 and must file a compliant joint list of unresolved discovery issues before the hearing.
- Discovery requests must describe the requested documents with reasonable particularity, and objections must be stated specifically. A burden objection must be supported by affidavits, other evidence, or sufficient information to permit a common-sense assessment of the burden.
- A party claiming privilege in response to discovery must provide a privilege log as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(5)(A)(ii).
Questions Presented
- Whether the parties should be required to meet and confer in good faith before the court hears defendants' motion to compel.
- What information the parties must provide concerning each unresolved discovery request so that the court can evaluate relevance, proportionality, specificity, burden, objections, and privilege.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (13)
- Helena Agri-Enterprises, LLC v. Great Lakes Grain, LLC, 988 F.3d 260, 273 (6th Cir. 2021)(followed)
- Weidman v. Ford Motor Company, No. CV 18-12719, 2021 WL 2349400, at *3 (E.D. Mich. June 9, 2021)(followed)
- Cratty v. City of Wyandotte, 296 F. Supp. 3d 854, 858 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 8, 2017)(followed)
- United States v. Quicken Loans, Inc., No. 16-CV-14050, 2018 WL 7351682, at *1 (E.D. Mich. June 5, 2018)(followed)
- Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Court for D.C., 542 U.S. 367, 387-388 (2004)(followed)
- Effyis, Inc. v. Kelly, No. 18-13391, 2020 WL 4915559, at *2 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 21, 2020)(followed)
- In re Heparin Products Liab. Litig., 273 F.R.D. 399, 410-11 (N.D. Ohio 2011)(followed)
- Vallejo v. Amgen, Inc., 903 F.3d 733, 743-44 (8th Cir. 2018)(followed)
- Siser N. Am., Inc. v. Herika G. Inc., 325 F.R.D. 200, 209-10 (E.D. Mich. 2018)(followed)
- Aprile Horse Transp., Inc. v. Prestige Delivery Sys., Inc., No. 5:13-CV-15-GNS-LLK, 2015 WL 4068457, at *3 (W.D. Ky. July 2, 2015)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 13.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…