Roehm v. Wal-Mart Stores, Incorporated

Filing 7

Attachment 1
DISCOVERY plan jointly filed pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(f) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A - Stipulation and Order Regarding Inadvertent Production of Privileged or Protected Trial Preparation Documents) (McCulloch, Debra)

Download PDF
Roehm v. Wal-Mart Stores, Incorporated Doc. 7 Att. 1 Case 2:07-cv-10168-LPZ-RSW Document 7-2 Filed 02/23/2007 Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT A UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION Julie Ann Roehm, Plaintiff, vs. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Defendant. CASE NO. 2:07-CV-10168 Hon. Lawrence P. Zatkoff John F. Schaefer (P19948) B. Andrew Rifkin (P46147) The Law Firm of John F. Schaefer Attorneys for Plaintiff 380 N. Old Woodward, Suite 320 Birmingham, MI 48009 (248) 642-6665 Debra M. McCulloch (P31995) DYKEMA GOSSETT, PLLC Attorneys for Defendant 39577 Woodward Avenue, Suite 300 Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304 (248) 203-0756 Eugene Scalia Karl G. Nelson David J. Debold (P39278) Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP Of Counsel for Defendant 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington D.C. 20036 (202) 955-8500 STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING INADVERTENT PRODUCTION OF PRIVILEGED OR PROTECTED TRIAL PREPARATION DOCUMENTS Plaintiff Julie Roehm and Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., having stipulated to and requested the Court to order that their production of documents in any form, including electronic communications, in this matter be governed by the following provisions; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. Any party to these proceedings who inadvertently produces for inspection or copying to an opposing party a document that the producing party later claims is protected by the Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:07-cv-10168-LPZ-RSW Document 7-2 Filed 02/23/2007 Page 2 of 3 attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine shall, despite such production, have the absolute right to withdraw such document from production upon written notice to the receiving party at any time prior to the close of discovery. Any document withdrawn from production in accordance with this paragraph shall be returned to the producing party by the receiving party, together with all copies made of such document, within ten (10) days after the date such notice is received. 2. A producing party who complies with the notice provisions of paragraph 1 shall not be deemed to have waived its claim of privilege or work-product protection by reason of the prior production of the document for inspection or copying. Nor shall a receiving party who complies with the provisions for the return of a document set forth in paragraph 1 be deemed to have waived its right to contest any claim that such document has been properly characterized as protected by any privilege or work-product protection. 3. The production of a document shall not be deemed a waiver by a producing party of its right to assert privilege or work-product protection concerning the subject matter of the document produced or to assert privilege or work-product protection as to other documents dealing with that subject matter. The return of any document withdrawn from production in accordance with paragraph 1, together with all copies made thereof, shall not be deemed a waiver by a receiving party of its right to contest any claim that such document, or any other documents dealing with the same subject matter as the returned document, has been properly characterized as protected by any privilege or work-product protection. U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE Entered this ______ day of _________________, 2007 2 Case 2:07-cv-10168-LPZ-RSW Document 7-2 Filed 02/23/2007 Page 3 of 3 The foregoing order is hereby stipulated to: By: ________________________________ John F. Schaefer (P19948) B.Andrew Rifkin (P46147) The Law Firm of John F. Schaefer Attorneys for Plaintiff 380 N. Old Woodward, Suite 320 Birmingham, MI 48009 (248) 642-6665 bar@lfjfs.com By: ________________________________ Debra M. McCulloch (P31995) William M. Thacker (P55916) Attorneys for Defendant Dykema Gossett PLLC 39577 Woodward Avenue, Suite 300 Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304 (248) 203-0700/(734) 214-7646 dmcculloch@dykema.com wthacker@dykema.com By: ________________________________ Eugene Scalia Karl G. Nelson David J. Debold (P39278) Of Counsel for Defendant 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 955-9500 EScalia@gibsondunn.com Date: February ____, 2007 BH01\706834.1 ID\DMM 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?