Heckel, Brian v. 3M Company et al

Filing 111

ORDER granting in part and denying in part plaintiff's 104 Motion to Compel; granting in part and denying in part defendant Weyerhaeuser's 105 Motion for Protective Order. Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 6/3/2015. (kwf)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
MILTON BOYER and KATHY BOYER,

v.

Plaintiffs,

WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY, 3M COMPANY,
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY, OWEN-ILLINOIS, CO.,

ORDER
14-cv-286-wmc

Defendants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------RICHARD MASEPHOL,

v.

Plaintiffs,

WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY, 3M COMPANY,
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY, and OWENS-ILLINOIS INC.,

14-cv-186-wmc

Defendants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------JANET PECHER, individually and as Special
Administrator on behalf of the Estate of Urban Pecher,

v.

Plaintiffs,

WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY, 3M COMPANY,
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY, and OWENS-ILLINOIS INC.,
Defendants.

14-cv-147-wmc

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------VIRGINIA PRUST, individually and as Special
Administrator on behalf of the Estate of Valmore Prust,
Plaintiff,
v.

14-cv-143-wmc

WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY, 3M COMPANY,
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY, and OWENS-ILLINOIS INC.,
Defendants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ROGER SEEHAFER and JANICE SEEHAFER,
Plaintiffs,
v.

14-cv-161-wmc

WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY and
OWENS-ILLINOIS INC.,
Defendants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------WESLEY F. SYDOW and THERESA SYDOW,

v.

Plaintiffs,

WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY, 3M COMPANY,
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY, and OWENS-ILLINOIS INC.,
Defendants.

2

14-cv-219-wmc

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------BRIAN HECKEL, Individually and
as Special Administrator for the purposes
of this lawsuit on behalf of Sharon Heckel,
Plaintiff,
v.

13-cv-459-wmc

3M COMPANY, CBS CORP., GENERAL
ELECTRIC CO., METROPOLITAN LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY, OWENS-ILLINOIS
INC., and WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY,
Defendants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------DIANNE JACOBS, individually and
as Special Administrator for the purposes
of this lawsuit on behalf of Rita Treutel,
Plaintiff,
v.

12-cv-899-wmc

OWENS-ILLINOIS INC., RAPID AMERICAN
CORPORATION, and WEYERHAEUSER
COMPANY,
Defendants,
RAPID AMERICAN CORPORATION,
Cross-claimant,
v.
OWENS-ILLINOIS INC. and WEYERHAEUSER
COMPANY,
Cross-Defendants.
The court held a telephonic hearing today on a number of pending discovery
motions and also addressed the scheduling orders in place in each case.
3

Plaintiffs

appeared by Attorney Robert G. McCoy. Defendant Weyerhaeuser Company appeared
by Attorney Joshua J. Metcalf; defendant Owens-Illinois appeared by Attorney Brian
O’Connor Watson; defendant 3M Company appeared by Attorney Bradley R. Bultman;
and defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company appeared by Attorney Smitha
Chintamaneni. 1 The purpose of this order is to set forth formally several rulings made
during the hearing.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1) by today, plaintiffs must sign and file the confidentiality agreement and
protective order previously proposed by defendant Weyerhaeuser. If plaintiffs
fail to do so timely, the court will entertain a motion for sanctions.
2) Plaintiffs’ motions to compel production of Weyerhaeuser’s documents
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 filed in two of the cases (‘161 dkt. #124; ‘899
dkt. #64) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows:
a) Request for Production No. 5: 2 Weyerhaeuser shall produce a list of all
such workers’ compensation claims by date filed against it for exposure
to asbestos without regard to the location where that specific employee
worked; in all other respects, denied.
b) Request for Production No 7: Weyerhaeuser shall produce the closing
documents or “binder” for these transactions; in all other respects,
denied.
c) Request for Production No. 8: Denied.
d) Request for Production No. 9: Weyerhaeuser shall produce all
responsive documents.
e) Request for Production No. 10: Subject to Weyerhaeuser’s objections, it
shall produce all responsive documents.

1

Formally speaking, each defendant appeared only in those cases for which it is named as
a party.

2

The numbers refer to those requests served in the Jacobs case.
4

f) Request for Production No. 16: Weyerhaeuser shall produce all
advertisements mentioning Owens-Illinois; in all other respects, denied.
g) Request for Production No. 17: Denied as moot.
h) Request for Production No. 28: Weyerhaeuser shall produce transaction
documents and invoices from Owens-Illinois; in all other respects,
denied.
i) Request for Production No. 30: Denied as duplicative of Request for
Production No. 7.
j) Request for Production No. 34: Weyerhaeuser shall produce all
responsive documents for past employees of the Marshfield plant only.
3) Plaintiffs’ motions to compel the 30(b)(6) deposition of defendant
Weyerhaeuser (‘286 dkt. #169; ‘186 dkt. #164; ‘147 dkt. #154; ‘143 dkt.
#150; ‘161 dkt. #141; ‘219 dkt. #173; ‘899 dkt. #106; ‘459 dkt. #104) and
defendant Weyerhaeuser’s related motions for protective order (‘286 dkt.
#170; ‘186 dkt. #165; ‘147 dkt. #155; ‘143 dkt. #151; ‘161 dkt. #164; ‘219
dkt. #174; ‘899 dkt. #107; ‘459 dkt. #105) are GRANTED IN PART AND
DENIED IN PART for the reasons provided on the record. Defendant
Weyerhaeuser is directed to produce in good faith individuals with knowledge
in the general areas relevant to plaintiffs’ nuisance claims. After that
deposition, plaintiffs may seek a further noticed 30(b)(6) deposition on a
narrow set of specific topics after consulting with Weyerhaeuser. If the parties
are unable to agree on any further deposition topics, they may return to this
court for further guidance.
4) Plaintiffs must make their experts available for deposition before July 15,
2015. In addition, plaintiffs must produce a complete copy of each noticed
expert’s file ten days before his or her deposition. Failure to do so timely will
result in sanctions by this court.
5) The deadline for filing dispositive motions in all eight of the above-captioned
cases is extended until August 1, 2015.
6) The trial dates in the Masephol, No. 14-cv-186, and Sydow, No. 14-cv-219,
cases are STRUCK. The trial in Masephol is rescheduled for December 7,
2015, and Sydow is rescheduled for June 6, 2016. In addition, the court set
trial dates for Jacobs, No. 12-cv-899, of July 6, 2016, and for Heckel, No. 13cv-459, of August 8, 2016. The court will enter amended scheduling orders in
these four cases.

5

7) In light of this court’s order granting plaintiffs Masephol and Boyer’s motions
for reconsideration, reinstating their respective claims against Owens-Illinois,
Owens-Illinois may have until June 24, 2015, to serve expert reports in those
two cases.
Entered this 3rd day of June, 2015.
BY THE COURT:

/s/
__________________________________
WILLIAM M. CONLEY
District Judge

6