Dl v. District of Columbia
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49788
| D.D.C. | 2011Background
- This case concerns the District of Columbia’s post-trial production of thousands of e-mails in a long-running EHA/IDEA case, following court orders directing production and waiving privileges.
- The court previously sanctioned the District in 2008 for “rolling” production and inadequate privilege handling, expressly rejecting that approach.
- Before trial in April 2011, plaintiffs moved to compel full production within one week after trial and to hold privileges waived; the court granted the motion and ordered production within one week.
- The District later produced thousands of e-mails many years old and certified production compliance, but continued to miss or mismanage court-directed timelines.
- Rule 26(e) required supplementation of discovery responses; the District’s post-trial production violated this supplementation duty and multiple court orders.
- The court denied the District’s motion for reconsideration, citing repeated, flagrant discovery violations and the need to deter future misconduct.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether waiver of privilege was an appropriate sanction | District ignored orders, justifying waiver | Sanctions must be reconsidered; possible lesser remedy | Waiver of privilege affirmed as appropriate sanction |
| Whether Rule 37 sanctions and 26(e) supplementation supported the orders | District failed to supplement and comply with orders | District complied in part; post-trial production warranted relief | Sanctions sustained; Rule 37 and 26(e) sanctions justified |
| Whether reconsideration was proper given the facts and law | Decision grounded in misconduct and deterrence | Errors in application of rules; new law not shown | Motion for reconsideration denied |
Key Cases Cited
- National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc., 427 U.S. 639 (1976) (sanctions and discovery disruption principles under Rule 37)
- Bonds v. District of Columbia, 93 F.3d 801 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (broad discretion to sanction discovery violations)
- United States v. Philip Morris, Inc., 347 F.3d 1114 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (waiver of privilege as a serious sanction for delay and bad faith)
- Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc. v. Clinton, 837 F. Supp. 454 (D.D.C. 1993) (critical evaluation of rolling discovery and privilege issues)
- Hoffman v. District of Columbia, 681 F. Supp. 2d 86 (D.D.C. 2010) (rule 54(b) reconsideration standards and discovery sanctions)