Modified Order on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel
Dawn Lane (Raleigh) recently obtained a favorable decision on a Motion for Reconsideration in an uninsured claim in which claimant sustained multiple injuries after being hit by a car in a parking lot. Our client was named as a defendant under the “piercing of the corporate veil” theory. Defendant responded to Plaintiff’s initial set of discovery requests, but objected to producing his financial statements. Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel seeking an Order compelling defendant produce his financial statements, including tax records. Within just 4 days, the IC inadvertently issued an Order allowing plaintiff’s motion to compel without allowing defendant his ten days to respond. Defendant immediately filed a response which argued that his financial records are irrelevant and an invasion of his privacy as he was not an employee of the named defendant-employer. In addition, defendant filed a Motion for Reconsideration as to the Order allowing plaintiff’s Motion to compel. As a result, the IC issued a modified Order allowing defendant to produce redacted financial statements only.
Cases or matters referenced do not represent the lawyer’s entire record. Each case is unique and must be evaluated on its own merits. The outcome of a particular case cannot be predicated upon a lawyer’s or a law firm’s past results.
