A recent decision from Judge Stark highlights an often-overlooked aspect of motions to compel: explaining why the documents are relevant in the first place.
In United Access Technologies, LLC v. AT&T Corp., C.A. No. 11-338-LPS (D. Del. June 12, 2020), the defendants moved to compel production of documents related to litigation funding, claiming that they were relevant to virtually every issue in the case. In denying the motion, Judge Stark rejected the defendants' theory of general relevance, finding that they failed to show that the requested documents were "relevant to the specific claims or defenses of this case."
If you enjoyed this post, consider subscribing to receive free e-mail updates about new posts.
