Written Discovery Fundamentals for Employment...
Transcript of Written Discovery Fundamentals for Employment...
Written Discovery Fundamentals for Employment Counsel Crafting Requests for and Responses to Interrogatories, Production and Other Written Discovery
Today’s faculty features:
1pm Eastern | 12pm Central | 11am Mountain | 10am Pacific
The audio portion of the conference may be accessed via the telephone or by using your computer's speakers. Please refer to the instructions emailed to registrants for additional information. If you have any questions, please contact Customer Service at 1-800-926-7926 ext. 10.
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2012
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A
Christopher M. Leh, Of Counsel, Littler Mendelson, Denver
Michele L. Maryott, Partner, Gibson Dunn, Orange County, Calif.
Conference Materials
If you have not printed the conference materials for this program, please complete the following steps:
• Click on the + sign next to “Conference Materials” in the middle of the left-hand column on your screen.
• Click on the tab labeled “Handouts” that appears, and there you will see a PDF of the slides for today's program.
• Double click on the PDF and a separate page will open.
• Print the slides by clicking on the printer icon.
Continuing Education Credits
For CLE purposes, please let us know how many people are listening at your location by completing each of the following steps:
• Close the notification box
• In the chat box, type (1) your company name and (2) the number of attendees at your location
• Click the SEND button beside the box
FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY
Tips for Optimal Quality
Sound Quality If you are listening via your computer speakers, please note that the quality of your sound will vary depending on the speed and quality of your internet connection. If the sound quality is not satisfactory and you are listening via your computer speakers, you may listen via the phone: dial 1-866-258-2056 and enter your PIN -when prompted. Otherwise, please send us a chat or e-mail [email protected] immediately so we can address the problem. If you dialed in and have any difficulties during the call, press *0 for assistance. Viewing Quality To maximize your screen, press the F11 key on your keyboard. To exit full screen, press the F11 key again.
Written Discovery Fundamentals for
Employment Counsel February 15, 2012
Michele L. Maryott Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP Irvine, California
Christopher M. Leh Littler Mendelson, PC Denver, Colorado
Overview
Keys To Effective Discovery In Employment Litigation
Discovery Planning Types Of Discovery Tools Responding To Discovery
6
Purposes of Discovery
Collect Information And Evidence For Trial Develop Factual And Legal Theories For Trial Building Blocks For Summary Judgment Position Case For Pretrial Settlement Narrow Issues For Trial Avoid Surprises At Trial
7
Practical Tips Beware Of Forms/Exemplars; Add Value In Discovery
Process Avoid Categorical Rules Planning Is Critical, But So Is Being Nimble To Conduct Effective Discovery, You Must Know Your Case Outline Elements Of Claims And Defenses Read The Complaint/Answer (Again) Jury Instructions Legal Research Memos
Review Any Prior Fact Investigation And Identify Evidentiary Gaps At The Outset
8
9
Make a Discovery Plan
Put The Plan In Writing And Revise Regularly Potential Sources Of Proof For Claims And Defenses Information To Be Obtained Discovery Procedures To Be Utilized Scheduling And Sequencing Keep Client Abreast
Focus On Obtaining Admissible Evidence That Supports Your Position And Opposes The Other Side’s Position
10
Think Strategically What Are The Litigation Objectives? What Do I Need To Prove My Case? Timing Plaintiff vs. Defendant Sequencing Of Written Discovery Documents Before/After Depositions
Evaluate Costs vs. Benefits Of Alternatives Consider Future Motions, Trial, And Appeal
Types of Written Discovery Tools
Informal Discovery Mandatory Disclosures Written Discovery Document Requests Interrogatories Requests For Admission
Subpoenas To Non-Parties Request For Medical Examination Request For Inspection
11
Fact Pattern The defendant is a large general construction contractor that is erecting a facility for manufacturing weapons for the U.S. Department of Defense. Plaintiff is a working foreman on the project who has had performance problems, including safety violations that have resulted in job-related injuries in the past. After he is injured again on the job, he files a workers’ compensation claim. The Company’s safety manager concludes that a safety violation by the Plaintiff is partly to blame for the injury. The company fires the Plaintiff. Plaintiff later files suit in federal court for Title VII retaliation and wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, claiming back and front pay, economic damages, and severe emotional distress. He claims that he supervised a top performing lead carpenter who was one of the only women on site. He alleges that one week before his final job-related injury, his boss told him that he was getting pressure from management, which doesn’t like women in construction because they take jobs away from men. According to Plaintiff, the boss told him he was uncomfortable delivering the message, but if Plaintiff wanted to keep his job, he’d agree to monitor that carpenter closely, come down hard on her for any mistakes, and help the company build a paper trail for disciplining her and then pressuring her to leave. Plaintiff contends he told his boss that he wouldn’t do it and that the boss told him that that would not be good for Plaintiff’s future with the company. Plaintiff wrote a lot about what happened to him on his private Facebook page and in emails to friends. His old boss recently called him to say he quit under pressure because he got tired of pressuring foremen to take actions that were illegal.
12
Protective Orders
Rule 26 Pros: Protecting Information Discharging Obligations To Non-Party Employees Facilitating Discovery
Cons: Ensuring All Or Most Information Becomes Public Creating Onerous Burdens
13
Protective Orders (cont’d)
Defense Considerations Scope Bases Process Interaction With Local Rules
14
Protective Orders (cont’d)
Plaintiff’s Content Bases Records 2-Level Protective Order Objections
15
Informal Discovery Advantages: Secrecy, Less Expensive,
“Unfiltered” Information Internet Research Public Record Searches Private Investigators Experts And Consultants Interviews (But Be Careful With Ex-Corporate
Employees)
16
Mandatory Disclosures Federal Rule 26(f) Conference And Joint Report Initial Disclosures – Rule 26(a) Expert Disclosures – Rule 26(b) No Need To Serve Discovery Requests For
Information That Must Be Disclosed Any Non-Privileged Matter Relevant To Any Party’s
Claim Or Defense For Good Cause, The Court May Permit Discovery
Of Information “Relevant To The Subject Matter Involved In The Action”
Duty To Supplement 17
Written Discovery
• Interrogatories • Document Requests • Requests For Admission • Requests For Inspection • Requests For Examination
18
Interrogatories - Overview Rule 33 Pros: Inexpensive Obtain All Information “Available” Obtain Details, Contentions Prepare For Plaintiff’s Deposition Signal Adversary About Problematic Factual/Legal
Issues Open Door For Other Discovery
Cons: Only Served On Parties Attorney-Drafted responses Slower Responses, No Spontaneity/Follow-Up
19
Interrogatories - Propounding Timing Know Your Purpose Structure Anticipating Objections Subjects Subjects To Consider Covering Subjects To Consider Avoiding
20
Interrogatories - Responding Limiting Number Of Sets Logistics Client Communications Objections Structure Simplicity With Accuracy & Completeness Avoiding Coyness Protective Order Privilege Log Verification
21
Interrogatories - Responding
Draft Carefully – Responses Are Binding And Will Be Shown In Depositions And At Trial Make Sure Client And Likely Rule 30(b)(6)
Witnesses Review And Approve Final Draft Of Responses If Factual Material Included Obligation To Supplement Responses
22
A Word on California Form Interrogatories
Form Interrogatories/Employment Form Interrogatories
Do Not Count Against Interrogatory Number Limit Literally Check Boxes Can Be Helpful, But Think Carefully Can Create A Lot Of Work – For Your Opponent Or
You Your State May Have Similar Kinds Of Rules
23
Written Discovery
• Interrogatories • Document Requests • Requests For Admission • Requests For Inspection • Requests For Examination
24
Document Requests - Overview
Rule 34 Pros: Documents Can’t Lie Unlimited Number Of Requests
Cons: Volume, Time-Consuming Lengthy Process To Compel
Be Careful What You Ask For – You Just Might Get It
25
26
Document Requests - Objectives
Carefully Draft To Avoid Vagueness Or Ambiguity Be Prepared To Articulate A Relevance Theory
For Each Request Tailor Scope Of Requests To Avoid Burden
Challenge Cover Important Issues With A Series Of
Requests, Using Both Broad And Specific Language
Avoid Meaningless Generalities Ultimately, The Rules Control Obligations Of
Responding Party
Document Requests - Propounding Specific Requests Documents Identified In Initial/Supplemental
Disclosures Communications With Witnesses And Non-
Witnesses Documents Supporting/Refuting Allegations Documents Supporting Responses To Rogs or
RFAs Documents Supporting Affirmative Defenses
27
Document Requests - Responding
Conduct Fact Investigation And Collect Documents Before Preparing Responses
Don’t Unequivocally State That Documents Will Be Produced If Responsive Docs May Not Exist
If No Responsive Documents Exist, State This Affirmatively
Get The Client Involved Early And Often Don’t Fight Over Unimportant Documents Turnabout Is Fair Play (Sometimes)
28
Document Requests - Responding
Ask Yourself How The Judge Will View Responses/Conduct
Boilerplate General Objections Typically Aren’t Viewed Favorably
Tailor Specific Objections To The Request(s) Focusing On Specific Grounds May Narrow
The Requests
29
Third-Party Discovery FRCP 45 (Incorporates FRCP 30 And 34 By Reference) Use A Subpoena To Compel: Deposition Appearance Production Of Documents Current Employers, Former Employers,
Employers With Whom Applied Medical Providers
Don’t Wait Until The Last Minute Best Practice: Check To See If Non-Party Is Client
Before Serving Subpoena Remember: Communications Are Not Privileged
30
Written Discovery
• Interrogatories • Document Requests • Requests For Admission • Requests For Inspection • Requests For Examination
31
Requests for Admission - Overview Rule 36 Pros: Binding Admission Against Party Pin Down Key Facts/Elements Opponent Risks Proof Sanctions
Cons: Rarely Dispositive Equivocal Denials Only Served On Parties
32
Requests for Admission – Propounding
Simplicity & Precision Is Crucial Establish Black/White Issues Lay Foundations For Admissibility Of
Documents Establish Facts You’d Rather Not Present At
Trial Don’t Take Too Many Issues Off The Table Consider Keeping Track Of Costs of Denial
33
Requests for Admission – Responding
Meet The Request State Any Qualification Don’t Be Coy As to Denials, Be Wary of Potential Costs Respond TIMELY! Sign RFAs As Counsel
34
Written Discovery
• Interrogatories • Document Requests • Requests For Admission • Requests For Inspection • Requests For Examination
35
Requests for Inspection
Rule 34 – Not Just Documents Inspect, Copy, Test, Sample Tangible
Thing/Place Reasonable Time, Place, Manner Establish Specific Protocol For Inspection Do Your Own Inspection
36
Written Discovery
• Interrogatories • Document Requests • Requests For Admission • Requests For Inspection • Requests For Examination
37
Requests for Examination Rule 35 Pros: Opportunity To Get Plaintiff Examined Opportunity To Get Plaintiff Tested Checking For Malingering, Overdramatization May Help Strengthen Own Expert’s Testimony
Cons: Expense Motion Practice Potential Bad Evidence Rather Rely On Own Consulting Expert -> Testifying Expert
38
Requests for Examination – Considerations for Both Sides
Defining Purpose(s) Voluntary through Negotiation When? Where? How Long? What Scope? What Method Of Examination? Who Is Examiner? Who Is Present And For What Purpose? Video Recording? When Is Report Due?
Involuntary Through Motion – Good Cause 39
Questions?
Michele L. Maryott Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP Irvine, California (949) 451-3945 [email protected]
Christopher M. Leh Littler Mendelson, PC Denver, Colorado (303) 362-2888 [email protected] @christopherleh
40