Remove Court Rules Remove Discovery Remove Exhibits
article thumbnail

Defendant’s Prejudice From Plaintiff’s Failure to Disclose Photographs Taken by Defendant Was Insufficient to Support an Exclusionary Discovery Sanction

E-Discovery LLC

. __, 2025 WL 1540660 (May 30, 2025), the defendant City claimed unfair surprise when plaintiff sought to introduce at trial photographs that the City had taken, but which plaintiff had not disclosed in discovery. In discovery, defendant asked for all photos, and any documents on which plaintiff intended to rely on at trial.

article thumbnail

Pro Se Renewed Motion for Sanctions is Denied

E-Discovery LLC

It wrote: The Court has ordered production of the redacted materials, which has been completed and, as the pending motion and exhibits thereto make clear, Mr. Adams-Devonish now has the benefit of the discovery he sought. The undersigned will then promptly schedule a recorded discovery conference.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Washington’s New Uniform Family Law Arbitration Act: Explanation, Application, and Aspiration

WA Bar News

The Act provides for selection and immunity of arbitrators, discovery protocols, attorney fees, and fair and expeditious resolutions. Recommendation : There is some uncertainty (until a Washington appellate court rules) about what can be waived in the statute as well as how to properly waive it.

article thumbnail

Understanding Jury Duty and Misconduct in the Legal Arena

Jury Analyst

Prejudiced jurors might exhibit partiality towards a party based on race, gender, religion, or other intrinsic characteristics, thereby violating the principle of impartiality. This infiltration of personal prejudice disrupts the court’s charge to administer justice dispassionately.

article thumbnail

Understanding Jury Duty and Misconduct in the Legal Arena

Jury Analyst

Prejudiced jurors might exhibit partiality towards a party based on race, gender, religion, or other intrinsic characteristics, thereby violating the principle of impartiality. This infiltration of personal prejudice disrupts the court’s charge to administer justice dispassionately.