Russell v. Maman

Background

Stephen Russell brought the case against Nir Maman, CT 707, George Akkelquist, DFW Metroplex Training Academy, Ryan Micheletti, and Legion Industries, Inc. The opinion states that Russell alleged violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and other federal and state laws based on alleged fraud involving security services. The present order addressed only a discovery dispute about the sequence of depositions.

Micheletti and Legion asked the court to compel Russell to appear for a deposition before the parties’ settlement conference, or otherwise to order the deposition without giving Russell priority. They argued that federal law does not create a deposition-priority rule and that Russell had not acted diligently in seeking their depositions. Russell argued that the other defendants should be deposed first because he had indicated more than a year earlier that he wanted to depose them. He also argued that taking his deposition first could allow defendants to coordinate their testimony. The opinion notes that Russell did not dispute the assertion that he had not served deposition notices for parties other than Micheletti.

Court’s analysis

The court explained that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(3) generally permits discovery methods to be used in any sequence and provides that discovery by one party does not require another party to delay discovery. The court rejected Russell’s arguments that he had a right to deposition priority and that deposing him first would create the risk he identified. The court stated that neither side had presented a compelling argument for the proper sequence, but that the court had broad discretion to set the order of discovery.

The opinion also discussed the parties’ repeated failure to cooperate in preparing joint discovery submissions. The court had previously directed counsel to meet and confer and prepare a joint letter. It criticized counsel’s unilateral filings and lack of good-faith cooperation, and stated that future unilateral discovery filings would not be accepted on the ground that one party disagreed with another party’s portion of a joint letter.

Ruling

Judge Seeborg ordered the depositions in this sequence: (1) Ryan Micheletti on November 5, 2020; (2) Stephen Russell on November 6, 2020; and (3) the remaining non-moving defendants whose depositions Russell had noticed, on consecutive dates completed by November 20, 2020. The depositions were ordered to occur by videoconference and begin at 9:00 a.m. Counsel were ordered to meet and confer by October 15 to determine the sequence and dates for the remaining defendants’ depositions, and to notify the court by October 16. The order resolves ECF Nos. 180, 182, 184, and 188.