The Simplified
E-Discovery Case Law Library
A collection of simple, easy to understand analyses and resources on e-discovery case law.
Case shelved under Proportionality
If You Fail, Try Again
Eagle Air Med Corp. v. Sentinel Air Medical Alliance
D. Nev. May 7, 2019
Why This Case Is Important
Courts and judges make mistakes. If a magistrate judge makes an erroneous ruling, don’t be afraid to ask the district court for reconsideration. You might win, like the plaintiffs in this case.
Overview:
In this defamation case between two airlines, the plaintiffs objected to the magistrate judge’s ruling, which prevented the plaintiff from compelling additional depositions of a third party.
The magistrate judge ruled that compelling additional depositions was “not relevant and proportional” to the litigation at issue. The plaintiff reiterated that discovery is relevant, because it was related to an essential element of their claim, and there were no other corroborating sources for the desired information.
Ruling:
- Plaintiff’s Objection Granted. The district judge disagreed with and overturned the magistrate judge’s orders based on their being “contrary to law and based on erroneous factual findings.” As a result, the plaintiffs can conduct additional depositions of the third party.
- Plaintiffs’ Original Motion Was Not Incomplete. Magistrate judge ruled that the plaintiffs’ motion was deficient because it did not (1) support their motion with “points and authorities,” and (2) serve the deposition notice properly. To the contrary, the district judge said this finding was “clearly erroneous.”
- Court Did Have Jurisdiction Over 3rd Party. Using the 9th Circuit’s three prong test for analyzing personal jurisdiction, the court ruled that the third party had a “substantial connection” with the forum state and the third party is in close proximity to the deposition site.
Download case law PDF
Download the PDF version of Eagle Air Med. Corp. v. Sentinel Air Medical Alliance case law alert here.
Legal Analysis
On Eagle Air Med Corp. v. Sentinel Air Medical Alliance
BY
David Cohen, Esq., Partner, Reed Smith LLP
When to object to the ruling of a Magistrate Judge requires discretion, especially if the Magistrate Judge may also be making further decisions in the case. When the ruling is sufficiently important, however, and you believe you can establish clear error, it can be time to respectfully take your shot.
David's Bio
relevant resource
Download this guide to understand the rules and requirements for e-discovery practices under the FRCP.
E-Book
FRCP & E-DISCOVERY: The Layman's Guide PDF
return to case law library
Proportionality room
Proportionality room