The reader's appreciation of this article may benefit from also reading related earlier posts on Insurance Claims and Issues Blog.
Failure to provide the requested production in one such case presented circumstances which famously led the Magistrate Judge presiding over discovery disputes in that Hurricane Sandy case, to conclude that the nonproduction warranted the imposition of sanctions.[1]
[1] In re Hurricane Sandy Cases, No. 14 MC 41 (Raimey v. Wright Nat’l Flood Ins. Co., No. 14 CV 461), 303 F.R.D. 17 (E.D.N.Y. 2014)(Brown, U.S.M.J.), affirmed “[f]or the reasons set forth in detail below,” and adopted in its entirety by United States District Judge, ___ F. Supp. 3d ___, 2014 WL 7399179, *1 (E.D.N.Y. December 31, 2014)(Bianco, U.S.D.J.). As noted in the immediately preceding footnote, the entire Committee of Magistrate Judges managing Hurricane Sandy cases has ruled that Magistrate Judge Brown’s discovery ruling applies to all of the pending Hurricane Sandy cases.
The District Judge listed in detail all of the many factors taken into account in the course of affirming and adopting the imposition of sanctions by Magistrate Judge Brown, factors which the District Judge summarized over the course of three (3) pages. Raimey v. Wright Nat’l Flood Ins. Co., ___ F. Supp. 3d ___, 2014 WL 7399179, *1-*3 (E.D.N.Y. December 31, 2014).
__________________________________________________
Reprinted with the permission of Thomson Reuters West from the manuscript of the author's 2015 Supplement chapters in “Catastrophe Claims: Insurance Coverage for Natural and Man-Made Disasters” ©2015 by Thomson Reuters West.
Please Read The Disclaimer.