Ross v. Indiana

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting interrogatories as “overbroad” because they contained “no limitations as to time, job category, and type of practice at issue”
• dismissing a plaintiff’s disparate impact claim based on a failure to allege a facially neutral policy or practice
• interrogatories seeking information regarding prior discrimination charges against defendant properly limited as to time, type of action or discrimination complained of, or job category
• plaintiff was permitted to propound interrogatories seeking information relating to prior instances of discrimination within certain parameters
• interrogatories were overbroad because they contained “no limitations with respect to time, type of action complained of ..., or type of discrimination alleged____”
• plaintiffs entitled to district-wide rather than merely facility-wide discovery where defendants made no showing that decisions were made at facility level, nor did defendants demonstrate hardship of complying with district-wide requests

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).