CX Reinsurance Company Limited v. Kirson

Filing 147

ORDER directing CS Re to email (with Johnson's counsel copies) its revised request to Raphael's General Counsel by the close of business tomorrow. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie A Gallagher on 4/26/2018. (bmhs, Deputy Clerk)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
CHAMBERS OF
STEPHANIE A. GALLAGHER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

101 WEST LOMBARD STREET
BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21201
[phone]
Fax [phone]

April 26, 2018
LETTER TO COUNSEL
RE:

CX Reinsurance Company Limited, f/k/a CNA Reinsurance Company Limited v.
Devon S. Johnson; Civil Case No. RWT-15-3132

Dear Counsel:
I have preliminarily reviewed the parties’ filings regarding CX Re’s request to Raphael &
Associates (“Raphael”) for documents. As background, during a conference call on Monday,
April 23, 2018, I directed counsel for CX Re to request Raphael (via email) to produce to CX Re
any responsive documents within Raphael’s possession, or, if none exist, to clarify whether it
destroyed them in accordance with its document retention policy. See [ECF No. 142 at 2].
Although CX Re sent the request, Johnson contends that CX Re’s diction “overtly signal[ed]” to
Raphael that it should not produce the requested documents,” because it was only asked to
“voluntarily” produce documents at the request made by Johnson, “a stranger to Raphael.” [ECF
No. 145-1 at 2]. Johnson also asserts that CX Re’s request was “far more broad[]” than
necessary, in an attempt to make Raphael’s production as “burdensome as possible” and to
increase the odds of Raphael denying CX Re’s request. Id. at 2-3.
I agree that CX Re should amend its request to Raphael. CX Re should clarify that it is
demanding the return of some of its own claim files from Raphael. Specifically, CX Re should
demand the return of documents relating to the Newsome and Harley claims. CX Re shall email
(with Johnson’s counsel copied) its revised request to Raphael’s General Counsel by the close of
business tomorrow, April 27, 2018. CX Re shall inform the court of Raphael’s reply, or should
notify the court if no response is received by May 2, 2018.
Despite the informal nature of this letter, it will be flagged as an Opinion and docketed as
an Order.

Sincerely yours,
/s/
Stephanie A. Gallagher
United States Magistrate Judge
cc: Judge Roger W. Titus