Haarmann v. Lueders

How courts have described this case

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

• refusing to dismiss because lesser sanctions could prove equally effective after repeated failures to produce discovery, evasive deposition testimony, vague responses to discovery requests, and noncompliance with two motions to compel
• “The court has broad discretion when reviewing a discovery dispute and ‘should independently determine the proper course of discovery based upon the arguments of the parties.’”
• “The court has broad discretion when reviewing a discovery dispute and ‘should independently determine the proper course of discovery based upon the arguments of the parties.’”
• “the discovery deadline specifies the date on which all discovery must be completed, therefore, any document requests must be served at least 30 days prior to the discovery deadline”
• “In cases where deeming certain facts to be established does not equate to a default judgment, this sanction is one of the ‘least harsh sanctions available to courts under Rule 37(b).’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).