UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTICT OF MINNESOTA

THIRD DIVISION

Civil No. 00-08 (DWF/AJB)

Northwest Airlines, Inc.,

Plaintiff,

v.

Local 2000, International, Brotherhood of Teamsters, AFL-CIO, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

 

This matter came on for hearing before the Court, Magistrate Judge Arthur J. Boylan, on February 2, 2000, at the U.S. Courthouse, 316 No. Robert St., St. Paul, MN 55101, on defendant's motion for protective order [Docket No. 42] and plaintiff's motion to compel discovery [No Docket No.]. Timothy R. Thornton, Esq., appeared in person and John J. Gallagher, Esq., appeared by telephone on behalf of the plaintiff. Michael B. Bloom, Esq., appeared in person and Barbara Harvey, Esq., and Paul Alan Levy, Esq., appeared by telephone on behalf of defendants. Defendants Griffin and Reeve move for protective order denying or limiting plaintiff's access to computer hardware and information and communications which may be contained on the computer hard drives. Plaintiff moves for an order compelling defendants to answer deposition questions and produce documents.

Based upon the file, memorandums, and arguments of counsel, the Court hereby makes the following ORDER:

    1. Defendants' motion for protective order is granted in part and denied in part [Docket No. 42].
    2. Plaintiff's motion to compel discovery is granted in part and denied in part [No Docket No.] as stated in the record.
    3. Defendants shall produce computer equipment at the various offices of Ernst and Young for purposes of examining and copying information and communications contained on the computer hard drives. The computer equipment shall be delivered by defendants and shall be examined by Ernst & Young personnel in accordance with terms of the attached Protocol for Inspection and Copying of Computer and Communications Equipment. Though the attached protocol is recited with substantially the same content as the proposed protocol submitted in letter form by plaintiff's counsel, (Plaintiff's Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel, Exh. G), provision is added requiring that Ernst and Young prepare an itemized list of individual communications which are determined to be responsive under terms of the protocol. Paragraph 6 of the protocol contains a modification of the corresponding paragraph in proposed protocol requiring that defendants be permitted opportunity to identify communications which may be privileged, related to union collective bargaining strategies and negotiating positions, or are otherwise arguably non-discoverable, prior to disclosure to plaintiff. Ernst & Young shall complete its inspection of each unit of equipment and shall provide the parties with an itemized listing of "data deemed responsive" and shall provide defendants copies of listed data within 24 hours of receipt of the particular piece of hardware. Defendants shall thereafter have 24 hours to review the documents, assert particularized objection to discovery items, disclose a privilege log with explanations, and advise Ernst & Young with regard to documents for which there is no objection to immediate disclosure to plaintiff Northwest.
    4. Plaintiff's use of information and communications obtained through discovery in this action shall be limited to use in the present litigation and may not be shared except between counsel of record in this matter and for purposes of this case, except by further Order of the Court.
    5. Plaintiff Northwest shall be responsible for full payment for services rendered by Ernst & Young.

Dated:

Arthur J. Boylan

United States Magistrate Judge