Riddell, Inc. v. Superior Court of L. A. Cnty.

Good Law
14 Cal. App. 5th 755·2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 724·222 Cal. Rptr. 3d 384·2017 WL 3614305
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 23, 2017B275482California6,252 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Menetrez, J.

*759 Riddell, Inc. and other football helmet manufacturers and affiliates (collectively Riddell) are defendants in lawsuits filed by numerous former professional football players alleging personal injuries resulting from their use of Riddell football helmets (the third party actions). Riddell filed suit against numerous insurers (collectively the Insurers) alleging that they owe Riddell a defense and indemnity in the third party actions. 1

*760 In Riddell's action against the Insurers (the coverage action), the Insurers propounded discovery seeking information relating to prior claims against Riddell, which model of Riddell helmet each of the plaintiffs in the third party actions wore, and the dates of use. Unsatisfied with Riddell's responses to some of the discovery requests, the Insurers moved to compel further responses, including privilege logs of documents Riddell had withheld in discovery responses that had already been provided. Riddell moved for a protective order staying the discovery at issue. The trial court granted the motions to compel and denied the motion for a protective order. Riddell filed the instant petition for a writ of mandate challenging those rulings…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.