Tag:Employment Discrimination

Collins v. ControlWorx, LLC (M.D. La. 2021)
Houston v. Southwest Airlines (N.D. Tex. 2020)

Collins v. ControlWorx, LLC (M.D. La. 2021)

Key Insight:

Defendant filed a Motion to Compel Plaintiff to produce audio recordings, hard drives, social media posts. Defendants’ Motion was granted. At least a portion of the data that Plaintiff was obligated to produce had been destroyed and/or missing due to a flood. After Plaintiff informed it of us, Defendant agreed to provide Plaintiff with an extension of time to correct his deficient discovery responses. Contingent on time for Plaintiff to allow his deposition to be retaken.

In his Response to Defendant’s Motion, Plaintiff did not assert that he complied with his discovery obligations but rather than production of the information sought was unreasonably cumulative or duplicative. For approximately 18 requests for production, Plaintiff failed to provide a response or objection, and failed to timely supplement his responses.

The Court granted largely Defendant’s Motion to Compel, ordering Plaintiff to respond to its requests for production, and supplement his responses to interrogatories, but also limiting Plaintiff’s responses to documents that would not require disclosure of attorney-client privilege and/or information that was not overly broad. Moreover, the Court ordered Plaintiff to appear for an additional supplemental deposition and also state that electronically stored information relevant to the litigation was actually destroyed (due to flooding) and submit the damaged storage devises for expert inspection. The

respective parties were responsible for their own attorney’s fees and costs regarding the discovery issues.

Nature of Case: Employment Discrimination, Family and Medical Leave Act

Electronic Data Involved: Hard Drives, Audio Recordings, Social Media Posts

Case Summary

Houston v. Southwest Airlines (N.D. Tex. 2020)

Key Insight: The litigation was over employment discrimination based on disability. Plaintiff brought the suit pro se. After Plaintiff failed to time respond to Defendant’s discovery requests, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Summary Judgment that was primarily based on Defendant’s failure to produce evidence of her claims a Motion for CR 11 sanctions was also filed.

Defendant based its Motions on Plaintiff’s failure to produce evidence of her purported disability, that she provided notification to her employer of the disability and/or that her employer failed to provide reasonable accommodation for her purported disability. The Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court grant Defendant’s Motion and dismiss all of Plaintiff’s claims and causes of action with prejudice. However, the Judge did not recommend imposing CR 11 sanctions against Plaintiff.

Nature of Case: Employment Discrimination, Disability Discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Surveillance Videos

Case Summary

Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.