Cochran et al v. The Hertz Corporation et al
AGREED UPON PROTECTIVE ORDER - The Court finds that the parties have agreed to the entry of this Order as a means of expediting discovery of documents and information which may be relevant herein. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (GJG)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
MILTON COCHRAN and MARY
THE HERTZ CORPORATION d/b/a
HERTZ RENT-A-CAR, a corporation;
GENERAL MOTORS LLC; and
LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE
CASE NO. 8:11-CV-281
AGREED DOCUMENT PROTECTIVE ORDER
This matter coming on before the Court on this 26th day of March, 2012, upon the
application of the parties for an entry of an Agreed Protective Order. Upon consideration of the
matter, the Court makes the following findings and orders:
The Court finds that the parties have agreed to the entry of this Order as a means of
expediting discovery of documents and information which may be relevant herein.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that:
PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINING CONFIDENTIAL STATUS
Prior to production of documents, General Motors LLC (“GM”) shall designate as
“confidential” or “produced pursuant to protective order” any such document, information or
materials it claims constitute trade secrets, confidential business information, or are otherwise
entitled to protection. The designation of Protected Documents may be made by marking or
placing the notice “Subject to Protective Order” or substantially similar notice, on the document,
or, where a copy of the original document is to be produced, on that copy.
The confidential status accorded any documents, information or material
produced pursuant to this Order shall remain in effect until further Order of this Court as to any
such document, information or material.
ORDERS REGARDING “CONFIDENTIAL” DOCUMENTS OR THINGS
With regard to those documents, information or materials which are accorded
“confidential” status as set forth above, the following orders shall be in effect:
Plaintiffs, Hertz Corporation d/b/a Hertz Rent-A-Car (Hertz), and their respective
counsel shall not provide copies of such documents, information or materials to any person or
entity except as otherwise provided below.
Plaintiffs’ and Hertz’s counsel may use all of such documents, information, and
materials in the ordinary course of prosecuting this litigation or any other litigation in which
Plaintiffs’ and Hertz’s counsel is employed, subject to the rules of evidence regarding
admissibility, and may make available such information to agents, representatives and employees
of Plaintiffs’ and Hertz’s counsel, parties to any such litigation, and experts or expert consultants
in such litigation and any other person necessary to Plaintiffs’ and Hertz’s counsel’s prosecution
of this litigation and/or any other litigation in which Plaintiffs’ and Hertz’s counsel is employed;
provided, however, that Plaintiffs’ and Hertz’s counsel and persons entitled to receive or review
such documents, information or materials pursuant to this Order shall not divulge or release such
documents, information or materials to GM’s competitors or others who might exploit such
documents, information or materials for their own economic gain.
Documents, information or materials produced pursuant to this Order, and any
copies thereof, may be disclosed to deponents or witnesses during the course of their preparation
for, and the taking of, their deposition or testimony. Prior to the disclosure of such information
to a deponent or witness, the attorney making disclosure shall advise the deponent or witness to
whom the documents, information or materials contained therein are to be disclosed that,
pursuant to this Order, such deponent or witness may not divulge any such materials or the
information contained therein to any other person, firm or corporation, except in their testimony
or to other attorneys involved in litigation against General Motors.
In the event that such confidential documents, information or materials are not
included with, or the contents thereof are in any way disclosed by any pleadings, motion,
deposition transcript or any other paper filed with this Court, such materials shall be kept
confidential and under seal until further Order of this Court.
After receiving the documents, Plaintiffs and Hertz have the right to file
objections to the confidential designation of any documents that Plaintiffs or Hertz believe are
not entitled to such a designation. After filing Plaintiffs’ or Hertz’s objections, GM shall have 30
days to file a motion with the court to determine whether the documents are entitled to
confidential treatment. The burden is upon GM to show that Plaintiffs’ and Hertz’s use of the
documents should be subject to any restrictions. The documents will maintain their confidential
designation pending resolution of Plaintiffs’ or Hertz’s objection and GM’s motion.
Plaintiffs’ and Hertz’s counsel shall maintain a list of names of each person
exclusive of attorneys who have heretofore been referenced in this Order, to whom confidential
documents, information and materials covered by this Order have been disclosed, and such list
shall be made available to counsel for GM, upon written request by counsel for GM, at the
conclusion of this litigation. This provision is intended to include experts, consultants or other
individuals that Plaintiffs’ and Hertz’s counsel may utilize in prosecution of this litigation.
At the conclusion of this lawsuit, and any other lawsuit similar in nature being
handled by Plaintiffs’ and Hertz’s attorney, by judgment, settlement, dismissal or otherwise,
Plaintiffs and Hertz shall return to counsel for GM, upon written request by counsel for GM, all
copies of information in this case designated “confidential” or “Produced Pursuant to Protective
Counsel for Plaintiffs and Hertz shall certify, by letter, compliance with the
requirements of this paragraph within sixty (60) days after receipt of a written request by counsel
for GM to return such confidential documents or materials.
This Protective Order and its terms may be modified by any subsequent Protective
Order to which Plaintiffs, Hertz, and GM have mutually agreed and/or which is entered by this
USE AT TRIAL
This Order shall have no effect on the offering or admission of documents at trial.
SIGNED AND ENTERED this 26th day of March, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Lyle E. Strom
LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT:
/s/ Victor C. Padios
Bryan S. Hatch
Victor C. Padios
Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP
1299 Farnam Street, #1501
Omaha, NE 68102
Mary Quinn Cooper
Andrew L. Richardson
McAfee & Taft
1717 S. Boulder, Ste 900
Tulsa OK 74119
Attorneys for Defendant General Motors LLC
/s/ Peter T. Kenney
Peter T. Kenney
Michael F. Kinney
8805 Indian Hills Dr.
Omaha NE 68114
Attorneys for Defendant The Hertz Corporation d/b/a Hertz Rent-A-Car
/s/ Christopher P. Welsh
Christopher P. Welsh
Welsh & Welsh
9290 West Dodge Rd
100 The Mark
Omaha NE 68114
10855 West Dodge Rd.
Suite 240, Two Old Mill
Omaha, NE 68154
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
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?