Falstaff Brewing Corp. v. Philip Morris Inc.

Good Law
89 F.R.D. 133·1981 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11084
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 28, 1981No. C-77-2733-WWSCalifornia1,308 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Schwarzer, J.

ORDER

Following the dismissal of this action by plaintiffs, defendants requested the return to them of more than a thousand pages of confidential documents produced by defendant Miller Brewing Company during discovery. Under the terms of a protective order entered July 7, 1978, pursuant to Rule 26(c), counsel for plaintiffs were required to return all such documents upon defendants’ request within ninety days after conclusion of the action. When that period expired in September 1980 without the documents having been returned, defendants moved for an order holding plaintiffs in contempt.

On October 29, 1980, the Court issued an order authorizing defendants’ counsel to investigate at plaintiffs’ expense the circumstances relating to plaintiffs’ apparent inability to locate and return the confidential documents. That investigation has now been completed with the cooperation of plaintiffs’ counsel and defendants have renewed their motion for an order holding plaintiffs in contempt. The parties have stipulated to submit the motion without hearing.

The investigation did not lead to the discovery of any of the missing confidential documents nor did it disclose how they were lost or…

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.