Bell v Novick Transfer Co.

D moved to dismiss the declaration because it does not have enough information

Fed. R. Civ P 8(a) only requires a short and plain statement of the claim, that the pleader is entitled for relief, and what relief.

The motion was overruled.

Discovery

Fisher v Ciba Specialty Chemicals Corp

Fisher v. Ciba Specialty Chems. Corp., 245 F.R.D. 539, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45292, 69 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 119

Fisher (et al.) involved 5 individual Ps whose land was contaminated by DDT.

D moved to sever the 5 Ps to individual trials because they claim it isn’t a single transaction (req’d under 20) and it would be prejudiced against them.

The motion is denied: Pursuant to Rules 20/21, the trials are of the same transaction and it would be much more inefficient for the 5 trials to have the same evidence 5 times.

Gordon v T.G.R. Logistics, Inc.

Gordon v. T.G.R. Logistics, Inc., 321 F.R.D. 401, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72978, 97 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 1056, 2017 WL 1947537

Facts

P alleges great harm from a car accident

D requests the entire Facebook history of P in discovery

P says Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1) puts that out of scope

Ruling

The court agrees (partially), and greatly reduces the amount of discovery allowed.

Reasoning

The entire Facebook history would be overly burdensome for what is needed here. The court limited the allowed facts greatly.