Felix, Amaliz, Individually & as Next of Friend & Mother of Robert A. Ruiz, Jr. v. Hassieb, Farouk A.
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 AMALIZ FELIX, individually and as 5 next friend and mother of ROBERT A. 5 RUIZ, JR., 5 5 Plaintiffs, 5 2006-CV-0049 v. 5 5 FAROUK A. HASSIEB, 5 5 Defendant. 5 __________________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. James L. Hymes, III, Esq. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL THIS MATTER is before the Court upon the parties’ Joint Stipulation Regarding Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Production of Transcribed Statements Taken by Defendant’s Insurance Company (Docket No. 24). Having reviewed the said joint stipulation and upon due consideration thereof, the Court finds that the statement at issue was given by Defendant to his insurer not in relation to a first party claim and, therefore, discoverable as generated in the ordinary course of business; but, rather, as part of the investigation of this third-party claim, in anticipation Case: 1:06-cv-00049-AET-GWC Document #: 42 Filed: 02/20/08 Page 1 of 2 Felix v. Hassieb 2006-CV-0049 Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel of litigation. See, e.g., Taylor v. …
Download the original document · Plain text (TXT) · Browse the archive · How this archive works
Original source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-vid-1_06-cv-00049/pdf/USCOURTS-vid-1_06-cv-00049-0.pdf
SHA-256 02378c107b7d6cb4023c85ced2052589638c1491b715842abe8443c37b45c50b
Re-using this document
two independent grounds: a work of the United States Government under 17 USC 105, AND a judicial opinion, which is an edict of government and uncopyrightable by anyone including the court that wrote it
Our description, tagging, arrangement, extracted text and machine transcripts are released under CC0 1.0. We assert nothing about the document itself.
Archive identifier LF-02378c107b7d
Document text
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 AMALIZ FELIX, individually and as 5 next friend and mother of ROBERT A. 5 RUIZ, JR., 5 5 Plaintiffs, 5 2006-CV-0049 v. 5 5 FAROUK A. HASSIEB, 5 5 Defendant. 5 __________________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. James L. Hymes, III, Esq. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL THIS MATTER is before the Court upon the parties’ Joint Stipulation Regarding Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Production of Transcribed Statements Taken by Defendant’s Insurance Company (Docket No. 24). Having reviewed the said joint stipulation and upon due consideration thereof, the Court finds that the statement at issue was given by Defendant to his insurer not in relation to a first party claim and, therefore, discoverable as generated in the ordinary course of business; but, rather, as part of the investigation of this third-party claim, in anticipation Case: 1:06-cv-00049-AET-GWC Document #: 42 Filed: 02/20/08 Page 1 of 2 Felix v. Hassieb 2006-CV-0049 Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel of litigation. See, e.g., Taylor v. Temple & Cutler, 192 F.R.D. 552, 558 (E.D. Mich. 1999) (citing Weitzman v. Blazing Pedals, Inc., 151 F.R.D. 125 (D. Colo. 1993)). Consequently, the Court finds that the statement at issue and the transcription thereof constitute work product and, therefore, not discoverable, absent a showing or substantial need or undue hardship. Plaintiffs’ bald assertion that they need the information at issue is insufficient to carry their burden. Accordingly, it is now hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Production of Transcribed Statements Taken by Defendant’s Insurance Company (Docket No. 24) is DENIED. ENTER: Dated: February 20, 2008 /s/ GEORGE W. CANNON, JR. U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE Case: 1:06-cv-00049-AET-GWC Document #: 42 Filed: 02/20/08 Page 2 of 2