Small Law Firms

Maybe Discovery Requests Don't Need To Be THIS Specific

Sometimes you just need some documents about these bastards.

By  
on

When electronic communication exploded the universe of potentially responsive documents, litigation reformers pushed to rein in the Federal Rules to end the tyranny of boilerplate language that forced litigants to wade through millions upon millions of pages of documents on meaningless fishing expeditions. From now on, discovery requests would have to carry some heightened specificity. Other jurisdictions followed the federal government’s lead and began a crackdown on out-of-control discovery requests as well.

But maybe we don’t need to be this specific. Here’s a sampling out of a suit in Miami-Dade County:

I can’t imagine “all documents, correspondence and communications referencing or related to the plaintiffs” would have sufficed.

The case is James Goldberg et al. v. Ronnie Moas, a wild dogfight surrounding Arbitrade, a cryptocurrency company that claims it has somewhere between $15-18 billion in gold reserves backing its currency — though it’s pretty light on the details there — and a financial analyst who apparently once backed the venture but has since publicly shared his belief that the company is a house of cards.

It seems there’s no love lost between the parties.

Sponsored

HeadshotJoe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.

Sponsored

Topics