Flores v. Southern Peru Copper Corp.

Brief Fact Summary.

The parties’ proposed discovery plan revealed a dispute regarding disclosure of insurance agreement information under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1)(A)(iv). The parties had agreed to adjourn the other disclosures required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1). At issue was whether the disclosure of the insurance information should also be adjourned.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

A district court can stay all required disclosures under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1) if the defendant makes a strong showing that the plaintiff’s claim is not meritorious.

Facts.

Should the court adjourn disclosure of the insurance agreement information until after resolution of Defendant’s motion to dismiss?

Issue.

Should the court adjourn disclosure of the insurance agreement information until after resolution of Defendant’s motion to dismiss?

Held.

Yes. The court sustained Defendant’s objection to disclosure of the insurance agreement information. Disclosure would be made at the same time as the other adjourned disclosures if the court denied Defendant’s dispositive motion.

Discussion.

Plaintiffs failed to show why they were willing to adjourn the other required disclosures but insisted on disclosure of the insurance agreement information. They did not suggest any way that their response to Defendant’s motion to dismiss would be informed by the insurance information, and the court found no useful purpose in requiring Defendant to find the information.