Rollins et al v. Traylor Bros Inc et al
ORDER granting Plaintiffs' 222 , 224 Motion for Sanctions to Strike Privilege Objections and for other terms, signed by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (SWT)
THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
LEONARD ROLLINS, et al.,
CASE NO. C14-1414-JCC
TRAYLOR BROS INC, et al.,
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions – to Strike
“Privilege” Objections and for other terms. (Dkt. Nos. 222 and 224.) Having reviewed the
Plaintiffs’ Motion, and all supporting documentation, the Defendants’ response (Dkt. No. 226),
the Plaintiffs’ reply (Dkt. No. 230), and the record in this matter, and having considered lesser
sanctions, the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion as detailed below.
Plaintiffs have been prejudiced by the late disclosure and non-disclosure of e-mails.
Defendants have not provided justification, other than inexcusable neglect, for the failure to
disclose and/or timely disclose. Defendants have admitted in Response that errors were made
and have taken reasonable steps to correct them, and the Court hereby approves the agreement
between the parties and incorporates it into this Order and otherwise ORDERS as follows:
1) Defendants will pay Plaintiffs’ counsel’s reasonable fees for consequences of the
error, including the costs of bringing this motion, deposing Mr. Lamb, and conferring
PAGE - 1
on the issues referenced in the motion. 1
2) Defendants shall review the archive copy of e-mails maintained for this litigation and
produce all non-privileged items not previously produced; produce a privilege log for
all truly privileged items; and, in addition, shall re-review all prior privilege log items
and disclose all non-privileged e-mails, within ten days of this Order.
3) If, as a result of the above, Plaintiffs obtain additional information, they may depose or
re-depose participants in the e-mail exchanges, and with costs but not attorney fees at
4) Plaintiffs may re-depose Chad Lamb under Rule 30(b)(6) at Defendants’ expense and
without the assertion of privilege by Defendants, except privilege may be asserted over
any actually privileged content of e-mails to or from counsel.
5) At least one relevant e-mail related to Exhibit D to the Hitzel Declaration was
requested in discovery and has been lost through no fault of Defendants’ counsel.
6) The discovery cutoff is hereby extended for Plaintiffs for 45 days for depositions by
Plaintiffs which are associated with this motion and the agreements of counsel.
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions (Dkt. Nos. 222 and 224) is
DATED this 29th day of June, 2017.
John C. Coughenour
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Defense counsel has already provided Plaintiffs’ counsel a check in the amount of $22,011.76.
(Dkt. No. 226 at 2; Dkt. No. 227-1.)
PAGE - 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?