Montgomery v. Sam's West, Inc.
Filing
10
CONSENT PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Senior Judge Graham Mullen on 11/21/2016. (eef)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
Case No. 3:16-cv-356-GCM
BETH MONTGOMERY,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SAM’S WEST, INC. d/b/a
SAM’S CLUB,
Defendant .
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CONSENT PROTECTIVE ORDER
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the respective parties
hereto and their counsel, that for any documents relating in any way to the claims in this matter
which are produced in response to discovery or otherwise shall be designated confidential by all
parties and the discovery and inspection of such documents shall be conducted pursuant to the
following terms, restrictions, and conditions:
1)
That all such documents produced and designated confidential shall be so deemed
"confidential" by the producing party;
2)
No such produced documents designated as confidential shall be used for any
purpose other than as necessary to the litigation of this case and for no other use or purpose;
3)
Disclosure of such confidential documents shall be limited to the parties, their
counsel and staff of record and experts for this litigation only. If documents are intended to be
provided to persons not listed herein, prior written consent from the producing party’s counsel is
required. Email consent is sufficient for this purpose.
4)
That before any of the documents designated as confidential are disclosed to any
such persons for purposes of this litigation, counsel of record shall insure that he or she has
received a copy of this order, has read and understands its contents, and agrees to be bound by its
terms and conditions.
5)
If any such confidential documents are used in connection with a deposition or
other discovery or hearing or trial before the court, the deposition transcript, filing or paper shall
be appropriately marked to indicate that the transcript, filing or paper is subject to the terms of
this protective order. If this protocol is inadvertently overlooked the terms and conditions of this
order nevertheless apply.
6)
Any dispute over confidentiality shall be submitted to the Court for resolution; provided,
however, that all terms of this order shall remain in effect until such resolution with respect to such
dispute.
7)
This consent protective order will also apply to testimony taken during depositions
including any corporate 30(b)(6) deposition which may transpire during the pendency of this case.
8)
Within 15 days of the entry of final judgment or dismissal of this litigation, including
appeals and petitions for review, counsel and any other persons given access to such documents shall,
within 60 days after request, return all confidential documents, including xeroxed copies of the same to
the party who produced the documents with a written certification by the person that all such documents
and copies of same have been, in fact, returned. Certification of destruction of the documents by the
retaining party may also suffice with prior permission.
9)
No term of this Protective Order will be the basis for the admission or exclusion of any
evidence at trial otherwise admissible.
THE ULTIMATE DISPOSITION OF PROTECTED MATERIALS IS SUBJECT TO A FINAL
ORDER OF THE COURT ON THE COMPLETION OF LITIGATION.
IT IS THEREFORE, ORDERED that this Protective Order, with the consent of the parties, is
hereby entered.
This the 21st day of November, 2016.
Signed: November 21, 2016
JAMES, MCELROY & DIEHL, P.A.
BROWN, CRUMP, VANORE & TIERNEY, L.L.P.
By:
/s/ Jennifer M. Houti
Jennifer M. Houti
NC State Bar No. 45442
600 South College Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Telephone: (704) 372 9870
Email: Jhouti@jmdlaw.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
By:
/s/ Michael W. Washburn
Michael W. Washburn
NC State Bar No. 20202
P. O. Box 1729
Raleigh, NC 27602-1729
Telephone: (919) 890-4480
Email: mwashburn@bcvtlaw.com
Attorney for Defendant
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?