Cooper et al v. Meritor, Inc. et al

Filing 492

ORDER granting (487) Motion to stay application of February 7, 2018 Order in case 4:16-cv-00052-DMB-JMV; granting (410) Motion to stay application of February 7, 2018 Order in case 4:16-cv-00053-DMB-JMV; granting (412) Motion to stay applicatio n of February 7, 2018 Order in case 4:16-cv-00054-DMB-JMV; granting (412) Motion to stay application of February 7, 2018 Order in case 4:16-cv-00055-DMB-JMV; granting (410) Motion to stay application of February 7, 2018 Order in case 4:16-cv-00056-DMB-JMV. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden on 2/20/18. Associated Cases: 4:16-cv-00052-DMB-JMV, 4:16-cv-00053-DMB-JMV, 4:16-cv-00054-DMB-JMV, 4:16-cv-00055-DMB-JMV, 4:16-cv-00056-DMB-JMV (ncb)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI GREENVILLE DIVISION BRENDA J. COOPER, ET AL. versus MERITOR, INC., ET AL. PLAINTIFFS Civil Action No. 4:16-cv-52-DMB-JMV DEFENDANTS - Consolidated With – JOE E. SLEDGE, ET AL. versus MERITOR, INC., ET AL. PLAINTIFFS Civil Action No. 4:16-cv-53-DMB- JMV DEFENDANTS - and KATHERINE LONGSTREET COOKE, ET AL. PLAINTIFFS versus Civil Action No. 4:16-cv-54-DMB-JMV MERITOR, INC., ET AL. DEFENDANTS SRA INVESTMENTS, LLC, ET AL. versus MERITOR, INC., ET AL. - and PLAINTIFFS Civil Action No. 4:16-cv-55-DMB-JMV DEFENDANTS FELICIA WILLIS, ET AL. versus MERITOR, INC., ET AL. - and PLAINTIFFS Civil Action No. 4:16-cv-56-DMB-JMV DEFENDANTS ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendants Meritor, Inc.; The Boeing Company; and Rockwell Automation, Inc.’s motion to stay that part of the undersigned’s February 7, 2018 Order that compelled full disclosure of inadvertently-produced “claw-back” documents. The undersigned has considered the motion, the response, the reply, and the applicable law and is of the opinion that consideration of the relevant factors weighs in favor of staying full disclosure of the documents (though it should be noted that in this instance the subject documents have previously been viewed by Plaintiffs’ counsel as a consequence of the documents’ inadvertent production to Plaintiff’s counsel). Plaintiffs’ counsel are directed to sequester–in accordance with FED.R.CIV.P. 26(b)(5)(B)–the subject documents pending entry of a decision by the district judge on any appeal of the February 7 Order or further order of the court, whichever is filed earlier. SO ORDERED this 20th day of February, 2018. /s/ Jane M. Virden U. S. Magistrate Judge 2

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?