Discovery

Question 1

1) Favale v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Bridgeport

Answer 1

1. Holding
   i) Treatment received for her anger management is not relevant because it does not pertain to the defense or claim of any party.

Question 2

1) Price v. Leflore

Answer 2

1. Holding
   i) The court may limit discovery when the expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit
   ii) Factors
   A. Needs of the case, the amount in controversy, the parties resources, the importance of the issues as stake, and the importance of discovery to the issue.

Question 3

2) Rengifo v. Erevos

Answer 3

1. Holding
   i) The opportunity to test the credibility of the P does not outweigh the public interest in allowing employees to enforce their rights.

Question 4

1) Hickman v. Taylor

Answer 4

Not even the most liberal of discovery theories can justify unwarranted inquiries into the files and the mental impressions of an attorney”

Question 5

Thompson v. The Haskell co.

Answer 5

1. Facts
   i) P sued the D for sexual harassment, alleging that the harassment reduced her to a severely depressed emotional state. She contended that 26(b)(4) protected certain documents from discovery.
2. Holding
   i) Information produced by or opinions of expert witness retained for the trial cannot be shielded from discovery unless there are exceptional circumstances.

Question 6

2) Chiquita International

Answer 6

1. Facts
   i) Bananas spoil on the docks because of an issue with the ships cranes, expert witness called in to examine the issue.
   2. Holding
   i) Information does not become exempt from discovery Merely because it is conveyed to a non-testifying witness