IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
July 9, 2009
MARKUS HUNTER, PLAINTIFFS,
C.O. DUTTON, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge
Now before the Court is Defendants' motion for protective order (Doc. 69). Specifically, Defendants move for a protective order forbidding deposition inquiry into a privileged document, Defendant Dutton's statement, inadvertently turned over in discovery. Defendants' counsel claims that he notified Plaintiff's counsel; asked that the document be returned or destroyed and that Plaintiff's counsel has done neither as Plaintiff's counsel has yet determined how to proceed.
FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 26(B)(5)(B)provides:
If information produced in discovery is subject to a claim of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation material, the party making the claim may notify any party that received the information of the claim and the basis for it. After being notified, a party must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies it has; must not use or disclose the information until the claim is resolved; must take reasonable steps to retrieve the information if the party disclosed it before being notified; and may promptly present the information to the court under seal for a determination of the claim. The producing party must preserve the information until the claim is resolved.
Rule 25(b)(5)(B) is clear and must be followed. The Court strongly and in the clearest language possible warns Plaintiff's counsel that the failure to comply with this Rule will result in sanctions. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion. The Court permanently FORBIDS inquiry into Bates 46 of Defendants Responses to Plaintiff's First Request for Production of Documents and ORDERS immediate compliance with the aforementioned rule.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
David R Herdo Chief Judge United States District Court
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.