Defendant Seeking Evidentiary Sanctions for Discovery Disputes
In Somers v. Digital Realty Trust Inc., Case No. 14-cv-05180-EMC(KAW), N.D. Cal. July 11, 2017, the court concluded that the parties were “incapable of meeting and conferring” and instead decided a number of discovery disputes for the parties.
One such dispute concerned electronic files that Plaintiff made available to Defendants via Dropbox. Plaintiff’s due date to provide the files was 3/31/17 but Plaintiffs did not place the files in Dropbox until 4/1/17 and did not provide the password until 4/3/17. Defendants sought terminating sanctions, alleging that they did not receive the documents until Plaintiff’s deposition was already underway and were unable to prepare properly. The court denied the request for terminating sanctions, and instead allowed Defendants an additional two hours for another deposition of Plaintiff.
Defendants also sought evidentiary sanctions regarding tape recordings Plaintiff sought to use at trial. Plaintiff had already produced the recordings pursuant to a court order, but Defendants claimed they were prejudiced because they were not provided before the depositions were taken. The court pointed out the contradiction of Defendants who sought a court order to have Plaintiff produce the tapes to them because they believed the tapes would be helpful, only to turn around and request evidentiary sanctions to prevent Plaintiff from using the tapes. The court denied the sanction request and pointed out that Defendants could question Plaintiff about the tapes in the extra hours of deposition the court granted.