Joe v. Amway Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• refusing to allow the recording of an examination because the plaintiff had not shown “special circumstances” supported by specific facts constituting good cause
• recording should be permitted only upon a showing of good cause
• explaining, where plaintiff argued that the examiner “would not be truly ‘independent’,” that “[j]ust as the defendant has deposed plaintiff’s treating therapist, plaintiff is free to depose Dr. Borden or to call him as a witness at trial and bring this relationship to the jury’s attention”
• analysis of whether a “third party” should be allowed, which is defined as a person or, indirectly, a recording device
• “The district court enjoys broad discretion when resolving discovery disputes, which should be exercised by determining the relevance of discovery requests, assessing oppressiveness, and weighing these factors in deciding whether discovery should be compelled.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).