Is a court’s order that compels overly broad discovery appealable?
"An order that compels overly broad discovery is an abuse of discretion for which mandamus is the proper remedy." In re Deere & Co., 299 S.W.3d 819, 820 (Tex. 2009) (orig. proceeding). An overbroad request is improper regardless of whether it is burdensome. In re Allstate Cnty. Mut. Ins. Co., 227 S.W.3d 667, 670 (Tex. 2007) (orig. proceeding). A discovery request is "overbroad" when it encompasses "time periods, products, or activities beyond those at issue in the case" and, therefore, is not "reasonably tailored to include only relevant matters." In re Alford Chevrolet-Geo, 997 S.W.2d 173, 180 n.1 (Tex. 1999) (orig. proceeding); see also Deere & Co., 299 S.W.3d at 820; In re Graco Children's Prods., 210 S.W.3d 598, 600 (Tex. 2006) (orig. proceeding).
Labels
- Affirmative Defenses
- Appeals
- Attorneys' Fees
- Contracts
- Copyright
- Damages
- Discovery
- Employees
- Employers
- Equity
- Evidence
- Fraud
- Infringement
- Injunctions
- Insurance Claims
- Jurisdiction
- Lost Profits
- Malpractice
- Mandamus
- Mistake
- Non-Compete Agreements
- Partners
- Partnerships
- Privileges
- Prospective Contracts
- Proximate Cause
- Quantum Meruit
- Remedies
- Shareholder Rights
- Special Appearance
- Specific Performance
- Statutes of Limitations
- Texas Theft Liability Act
- Tortious Interference
- Trade Secrets
- Trademark
- Unfair Competition by Misappropriation
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment