In re Heb Grocery Co.
2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 5409
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- HEB Grocery Company petitioned for writ of mandamus to limit discovery in Lara v. HEB after a slip-and-fall at a Houston store.
- Lara sought discovery about incidents at all Houston HEB stores, the store where Lara fell, and related employee and training files.
- The trial court ordered broad discovery responses, including non-specific incidents at other stores.
- HEB argued the requests were overbroad and not tailored to Lara’s premises-liability claim.
- The court conditionally granted mandamus relief to narrow several discovery orders, with some aspects preserved.
- The opinion discusses the scope of discovery in premises liability and the proper tailoring of requests.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overbreadth of discovery from all Houston HEB stores | Lara seeks relevant incidents to show knowledge and risk | HEB argues breadth is overbroad and burdensome | Partial mandamus relief; some overbreadth issues sustained |
| Similar incidents at other stores admissibility | Incidents at other stores may show knowledge and breach | Evidence must be reasonably similar and probative | Overbreadth sustained for broader requests; some narrow, similar-conditions evidence allowed |
| Discovery of all incidents at the subject store for five years | Relevant to policies and training | Burden and scope too broad | Interrogatory No. 9 overbroad; vacated |
| Employment and training records scope | Records may reveal safety training and responsibility | Overbreadth and privacy concerns; need tailoring | Partial relief; limited production permitted for specific periods and items; broader requests denied |
| Certifications of attendance and training for others present | Training history could reveal floor-safety practices | Requests overly broad beyond relevant personnel | Partial relief; narrowed scope granted, other portions denied |
Key Cases Cited
- In re CSX Corp., 124 S.W.3d 149 (Tex. 2003) (abuse of discretion when discovery is overly broad)
- In re Colonial Pipeline Co., 968 S.W.2d 938 (Tex. 1998) (scope of discovery largely within trial court's discretion)
- Dillard Dept. Stores, Inc. v. Hall, 909 S.W.2d 491 (Tex. 1995) (overbroad discovery; fishing expeditions not allowed)
- K Mart Corp. v. Sanderson, 937 S.W.2d 429 (Tex. 1996) (overbroad discovery across time/locations improper)
- Missouri Pac. R.R. Co. v. Cooper, 563 S.W.2d 233 (Tex.1978) (admissibility of similar incidents requires reasonably similar conditions)
- McEwen v. Wal-Mart Stores, 975 S.W.2d 25 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1998) (prior similar incidents may be admissible for premises liability)
- Henry v. Mrs. Baird's Bakeries, Inc., 475 S.W.2d 288 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1971) (test of similar conditions for admission of prior incidents)