Haukereid v. National Passenger Railroad Corporation

Filing 30

ORDER relating actions taken by the Court following the 12 December 2013 discovery hearing. Supplemental production by each party due by 15 January 2014. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 12/13/2013. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION

SCOTT HAUKEREID, individually and as
Personal Representative and Administrator
of the Estate of Andrew Haukereid Jr., deceased

v.

PLAINTIFF

No. 3:13-cv-92-DPM

NATIONAL PASSENGER RAILROAD
CORPORATION, dfb/a AMTRAK

DEFENDANT

ORDER
The Court held a discovery hearing with counsel on 12 December 2013.
For the reasons stated on the record, the Court took the following actions.
1. Amtrak's objection to Haukereid' s Interrogatory 10 and Request for
Production 10 is overruled. The Court orders Amtrak to provide the phone
numbers of the others passengers, and their mailing addresses and email
addresses, if available.
2. Amtrak's objection to Haukereid' s Interrogatory 11 and Request for
Production 11 is sustained. With the exception of the one employee who no
longer works for Amtrak, Haukereid may communicate with these Amtrak
employees only in the presence of counsel. Paris v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.,

450 F. Supp. 2d 913, 914-15 (E.D. Ark. 2006); ARK. RULES OF PROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT R. 4.2, cmt. 7. As discussed, key individuals should be deposed; all
others informally interviewed.
3. Amtrak's objection to Haukereid' s Interrogatory 16 and Request for
Production 16 is overruled. Amtrak shall produce the investigation reports
for every incident involving a passenger who fell out of a door while a train
was between stops.
4. Amtrak's objection to Haukereid's Interrogatory 17 is sustained.
5. Amtrak's objection to Haukereid' s Interrogatory 24, which the Court
construes as a request for a privilege log, is mostly overruled. But if Amtrak
asserts any particularized objection based on attorney-client privilege or work
product, then Amtrak must prepare a privilege log.
6. Amtrak's objection to Haukereid' s Request for Production 13 is
overruled. The Court orders Amtrak to make and provide copies of the
passenger surveillance videos and charge Haukereid a reasonable cost for
reproduction.
7. Amtrak's objection to Haukereid's Request for Production 26 is
sustained.

Amtrak's

communications with

-2-

the

Federal

Railroad

Administration about this accident are protected. 49 U.S.C. § 20903; 49 C.P.R.
§ 225.7(b).

8. Amtrak's objection to Haukereid's Request for Production 29 is
mostly overruled. The Court orders Amtrak to produce design-change
studies relating to how doors open and close, dating back twenty years from
the date of the accident.
9. Haukereid' s objection to contention discovery is overruled. The
Court orders Haukereid to respond to the contention discovery,
Interrogatories 14, 15, & 16, and Requests for Production 32, 33, & 36, with the
facts it now has, reserving the right to supplement until discovery ends.
10. Haukereid's objection to discovery about statutory beneficiaries is
overruled in part and sustained in part. The Court orders Haukereid to
provide mental health authorizations covering the last twenty years for each
statutory beneficiary, Second Requests for Production 1, 2, 3, & 4, and Greg
Haukereid' s arrest and criminal conviction history, First Request for
Production 41. The Court sustains Haukereid's objection to the full health
authorizations, First Requests for Production 3 & 4.
11. Haukereid' s objection to Request for Production 53 is sustained.

-3-

12. Haukereid' s oral motion for the event recorder data is denied
without prejudice.
Supplemental production by each party due by 15 January 2014.

So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr.
United States District Judge

-4-