Bailey v. South Carolina

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• imposing a fine of $15,000 “for the unnecessary consumption of the court’s time and resources” as a result of defendant’s “reckless and irresponsible abrogation of its responsibility to assure full compliance with discovery requests”
• noting numerous courts after LaBuy have approved the appointment of special masters where parties have failed to comply with court orders, displayed intransigence in the litigation, or required close supervision.
• defendant’s employment of an “unconscionably careless procedure to handle discovery matters, suggesting a callous disregard for its obligations as a litigant,” warranted sanctions
• variety of discovery sanctions approved for discovery 19 abuses, including appointment of a special master to conduct discovery––at the offending party’s 20 expense
• “The reasonableness of the inquiry is measured by an 7 objective standard . . . .”
• “The 13 reasonableness of the inquiry is measured by an objective standard . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).