A. et al v. Doe Run Resources Corporation et al

Filing 749

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Production of 30(b)(6) Witnesses on Financial Topics 732 is granted in part and denied in part as follows: (SEE MEMORANDUM AND ORDER FOR COMPLETE DETAILS.). Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on December 8, 2017. (MCB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
A.O.A., et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
IRA L. RENNERT, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:11 CV 44 CDP

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Certain Rule 30(b)(6) depositions of defendants’ corporate representatives
are scheduled to begin next week. Meanwhile, pending before me is plaintiffs’
motion to compel defendants to produce 30(b)(6) witnesses on financial topics.
Having fully considered the issues raised and the parties’ respective positions,1
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Production
of 30(b)(6) Witnesses on Financial Topics [732] is granted in part and denied in
part as follows:
• Subsidiaries –– Plaintiffs agreed to limit the terms “You” and “Your”
defined in the Notices of Videotaped Deposition to not include subsidiary
companies, and my earlier ruling on plaintiffs’ motion to compel 30(b)(6)
1

Because the depositions are scheduled to begin December 14, and the parties have submitted
sufficient information for me to rule the motion, I have determined to make my ruling before
plaintiffs’ reply brief is due.

witnesses incorporated this agreement. I do not agree with defendants that
this limitation of the terms “You” and “Your” removed all consideration of
any subsidiary information. To the extent the Notices specifically request
information relating to a subsidiary or subsidiaries, plaintiffs’ motion is
granted. If defendants have knowledge responsive to a specific request
relating to a subsidiary, they must produce a person or persons most familiar
with the topics and prepared to testify.
• Production/Identification of Documents –– This issue was discussed during
the status conference held December 7, 2017. For the reasons stated at that
conference, plaintiffs’ request that defendants produce documents prior to
the deposition(s) and/or lists of documents reviewed by witnesses in
preparation for deposition is denied, subject to defendants’ duty to
supplement their previous production if new responsive documents are
discovered during such preparation, including documents reviewed in
preparation for Renco Topic 24 and Renco Topic 30 / Doe Run Resources
Topic 27.
• La Oroya Complex –– Defendants acknowledge plaintiffs’ entitlement to
30(b)(6) testimony on topics concerning financial transfers and involvement
in loans related to the La Oroya Complex. Plaintiffs’ motion to compel
30(b)(6) testimony on Renco Topic 32 / Doe Run Resources Topic 29 is

-2-

granted. Defendants must produce a person or persons most familiar with
the topic and prepared to testify.

CATHERINE D. PERRY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated this 8th day of December, 2017.

-3-