Susan Locke v. Oakland County, et al.

Summary

This is an order from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan directing the parties to meet and confer regarding a motion to compel discovery. The order requires the parties to file a joint list of unresolved discovery issues by April 1, 2026, and sets a hearing for April 7, 2026; it was entered by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Stafford on February 17, 2026.

Holdings

1. The parties must meet and confer in good faith in person or by video as required by E.D. Mich. LR 37.1, and must file a joint list of unresolved discovery issues before the hearing.
2. The parties' arguments must address relevance to a specific claim or defense and the proportionality factors under the current version of Rule 26(b)(1); document requests must describe the requested items with reasonable particularity, and objections must be stated with specificity.
3. A party objecting that document production is burdensome must provide affidavits, other evidence, or sufficient information for the court to make a common-sense judgment; boilerplate objections and objections coupled with production may be deemed waived.
4. A responding party claiming privilege must provide a privilege log satisfying Rule 26(b)(5)(A)(ii), and the parties must engage in informed, cooperative, and transparent discussions concerning the search for electronically stored information.

Questions Presented

1. What meet-and-confer and joint-submission procedures should govern the parties' dispute over plaintiff's motion to compel?
2. What standards must the parties apply when describing discovery requests, asserting objections, addressing relevance and proportionality, claiming burden or privilege, and discussing electronically stored information?

Disposition

other