Moore v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Background

The parties submitted a joint discovery letter about plaintiffs’ proposed depositions of two JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. employees who worked in the bank’s “fraud queue.” Plaintiffs noticed the depositions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(1), which allows a party to request another party’s deposition by serving a notice.

The court explained that a corporate employee or agent who is not an officer, director, or managing agent generally cannot be deposed by notice. Instead, that person must be subpoenaed like a nonparty. Courts assess whether someone is a managing agent by considering the person’s authority and discretion, whether the employer can rely on the person to testify at the employer’s request, whether higher-level employees exist in the relevant area, and the person’s responsibilities concerning the litigation.

Court’s Analysis

The court found that two factors weighed against treating the fraud-queue employees as managing agents: they generally did not exercise judgment, and they were subject to higher authority. Two other factors weighed in favor: Chase appeared able to produce the employees for deposition, and their responsibilities were highly relevant to the fraud investigation at the center of the case.

The court also rejected the significance of the fact that other people had investigated the plaintiffs’ claim. It concluded that taking both depositions served the parties’ shared interests in efficiency and proportionality. Using a practical approach, the court held that the two employees were managing agents for purposes of depositions under Rule 30(b)(1).

Ruling

The court ruled that plaintiffs were entitled to test Chase’s assertion that the employees did not remember their work on the fraud claim from two years earlier and that they had strictly followed Chase’s policies. The court therefore allowed plaintiffs to proceed with the Rule 30(b)(1) depositions without requiring subpoenas based on the employees’ status as managing agents for this purpose.

Because of the low dollar amount at issue and plaintiffs’ offer, the court limited plaintiffs to seven hours total for all depositions they take in the case. Judge Jacquelyn Scott Corley entered the order on April 4, 2023.