Guzman et al v. Mel S Harris and Associates, LLC et al

Filing 148

OPINION AND ORDER re: 135 LETTER MOTION to Compel Plaintiff to produce discovery materials addressed to Magistrate Judge Ronald L. Ellis from Scott S. Balber dated 17th March 2017 filed by LR Credit 13, LLC. The Court finds that the settlement agreement is not relevant and does not appear to have been requested in discovery. In its pre-motion letter, LRC did not ask that the settlement agreement be compelled, (Doc. No. 112.), and during the status conference , LRC stated that they were not seeking a copy of the settlement agreement at that time. (Hr'g Tr. at 28.) Additionally, the Court finds LRC's argument that the settlement agreement may contain admissions of guilt by the terminated Defendants speculative and doubtful. Therefore, LRC's motion to compel the settlement agreement is DENIED. As for the financial records, the Court did not make a final determination concerning the production of post-settlement bank record s. Instead, the Court instructed the Parties to brief the issue of confidentiality, intending to consider the Parties' submissions before deciding. (Hr'g Tr. at 32.) Financial records through the close of discovery are relevant bec ause Guzman alleges that emotional damages are continuing. Although LRC may be able to extrapolate from the bank records the amount of the settlement agreement referenced earlier in this Opinion, Guzman has not set forth any meritorious argument a gainst such disclosure. What is discoverable may not be admissible at trial. Therefore, concerns about the use of such records at trial can be raised at a later point. LRC's motion to compel financial documents post-settlement is GRANTED. Guzman is to submit responsive documents on or before May 18, 2017. The Clerk of the Court is instructed to terminate docket number 135. (As further set forth in this Opinion and Order.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Ronald L. Ellis on 5/4/2017) (mro)

Download PDF

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?