Butler v. Rigby
Lawyer trying to get patent medical info out of the doctor’s office to see if the doctor is being shady
1.) Begins with a mandatory planning conference under court supervision
2.) Requirement to make certain disclosures without being asked
3.) Requirement to supplement disclosers at certain points along the way, along the discovery process.
1.) Initial disclosures (early on in the process, relevant to the allegations in the pleading
2.) Depositions: testimony taken under oath
3.) Interrogatories to parties
4.) Request for documents or other things
5.) Physical and mental examinations
Idea of relevance: notion of the scope of discovery. What is it?
1.) Is the party entitled to it? Is the information discoverable?
2.) Is this the right way to get it?
RULE 26(b)(1): A legal privilege can protect certain info from discovery, even when its relevant to the case
RULE 26(b)(2): Court can limit discovery if it is too inconvenient or burdensome. Burden or expense of discovery outweighs its likely benefit
RULE 26(c): allows for the individuals from whom discovery is sought to move for protective order even if they are not parties to the suit.
RULE: A legal privilege can be used to protect information from discovery under RULE 26 (even if it is relevant to the case).