You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Mercer v. Gerry Baby Products Co.

Citations: 160 F.R.D. 576; 32 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 571; 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10679; 1995 WL 103891Docket: Civ. No. 3-93-CV-10168

Court: District Court, S.D. Iowa; February 16, 1995; Federal District Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

This case involves a complex litigation stemming from a tragic fire incident on January 18, 1993, leading to a child's death and serious injuries to another, allegedly caused by a defective baby monitor. The Plaintiff initiated the lawsuit on November 10, 1993, naming the monitor's manufacturer, Gerry, as a defendant, which subsequently filed Third-Party Complaints against additional entities. The litigation has been marked by significant hostility between the parties' counsel, resulting in a chaotic discovery process with numerous motions to compel, stay discovery, and for protective orders. The court intervened to restore order by appointing a special master to oversee discovery, manage disputes, and facilitate settlement discussions. Sanctions were imposed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37 against a defense attorney for unreasonable deposition scheduling. Furthermore, the court provided a structured timeline for completing discovery and set the stage for trial preparation. The court also underscored the importance of professionalism, urging adherence to the Iowa State Bar Association's Code of Professionalism to maintain civility and respect in legal proceedings. The case continues to progress with an amended pretrial schedule and the involvement of a special master to guide the parties toward resolution.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appointment of Special Master under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 53

Application: Due to the complex and contentious nature of the case, the court appointed a special master to manage discovery and settlement discussions to improve efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

Reasoning: Appointment of a special master, attorney Robert Allbee, has been made to enhance efficiency and cost-effectiveness in managing discovery and settlement discussions, as per Fed. R. Civ. P. 53.

Discovery Sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37

Application: The court imposed sanctions against Mr. Wallace for unreasonable scheduling that led to a wasted deposition day, awarding attorneys' fees to several parties.

Reasoning: The court found Mr. Wallace's scheduling unreasonable and granted sanctions under Fed. R.Civ. P. 37, awarding attorneys' fees totaling $1,740 to various parties.

Procedural Management and Scheduling in Complex Litigation

Application: The court set an amended pretrial schedule to streamline the litigation process, with specific deadlines for discovery completion and trial scheduling.

Reasoning: An amended pretrial schedule was set, requiring all discovery to be completed by October 1, 1995, with specific deadlines for fact and expert witness disclosures and dispositive motions.

Professional Conduct and Lawyer Civility

Application: The court emphasized adherence to the Code of Professionalism, highlighting the necessity for objectivity, respect, and civility among lawyers to avoid unnecessary delays and antagonistic behavior.

Reasoning: The Code of Professionalism from the Iowa State Bar Association outlines essential principles for lawyer conduct, emphasizing the importance of objectivity, respect, and civility in interactions with clients, opposing counsel, and the court.