Buining v. The S.S. Transporter

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that relevance and importance of discovery were not generally considered by courts in deciding whether to consider an untimely motion, and that both were inconsistent with a delay in seeking the discovery
• noting that relevance and importance of discovery were not generally considered by courts in deciding whether to consider an untimely motion, and that both were inconsistent with a delay in seeking the discovery
• noting that relevance and importance of discovery were not generally considered by courts in deciding whether to consider an untimely motion, and that both were inconsistent with a delay in seeking the discovery
• finding defendant’s motion to compel untimely where filed two weeks after discovery deadline, even though it was filed on day of scheduling order deadline for all motions
• denying motion to compel filed two weeks after discovery deadline and nine and a half months after documents were produced
• ‘‘the alleged importance of the documents appears inconsistent with the delay in seeking the documents”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).