Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
52. Should the court grant the buyer's motion to compel?
The buyer then moved for an order compelling further disclosures from the dealership, arguing that the dealership's disclosures were materially incomplete, and certifying that the buyer had, in good faith, made attempts to confer with the dealership to obtain further disclosures without court action.
After the date for delivery had passed, a buyer sued a dealership that had promised to deliver to him, by June 1, 2021, a new car meeting certain specifications. The suit was filed in federal court. In its initial disclosures, the dealership timely provided to the buyer the name, address, and phone number of the dealership manager and of persons who worked at the auto manufacturer who had information regarding the failed delivery. The dealership did not provide the name, address or phone number of other persons who worked at the dealership who knew of the dealership's delay in delivery because the dealership did not believe these individuals had additional discoverable information and the dealership did not intend on calling these individuals as witnesses should the case proceed to trial. The buyer failed to make a timely initial disclosure to the dealership.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
Three types of disclosures are required: initial disclosures, disclosures of expert testimony, and pretrial disclosures. Parties are not excused from making their initial disclosures because another party has not made their initial disclosures.
Without waiting for a discovery request, a party must provide to other parties the names and contact information for individuals likely to have discoverable information that the disclosing party may use to support its claims or defenses unless the use would be solely for impeachment. A party must also disclose copies or descriptions of documents or other tangible things that are in the disclosing party's possession or control and that the disclosing party may use to support its claims or defenses unless the use would be solely for impeachment. These disclosures must be made within 14 days after the meeting of the parties required by Rule 26(f).
C is correct. As the fact pattern indicates, the dealership does not intend to use information from the other persons that the dealership did not disclose. Further, information that the other persons possessed was only that they knew that the delivery was delayed, and therefore their information would not have to be disclosed.
A is incorrect. Under Rule 26, parties are required to make certain initial disclosures to other parties without a discovery request. Here, the dealership has not failed to complete its initial disclosures because it provided a witness list to the buyer and it is not obligated to disclose other witnesses that it does not intend to use to support its claims or defenses.
B is incorrect. Although a party is required to supplement discovery with witnesses they intend to use to support its claims or defenses, the dealership does not intend to use the information from the other persons at the dealership. Therefore, the dealership has provided complete initial disclosures, no duty to supplement has arisen, and the court should not grant the buyer's motion to compel.
D is incorrect. Although it is true that the buyer's failure to make his own initial disclosures is no excuse for the dealership's failure to make complete disclosure, for the reasons stated above, the dealership did not breach its obligations in failing to identify the persons whom the dealership did not intend to use in support of its claims or defenses.