RESULT MARKETING GROUP, LTD.
v.
SOUTHEASTERN GROCERS, INC.
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Result Marketing Group, LTD’s Motion to Quash Subpoena for Quotient Settlement Agreement (“Motion”) (Doc. 112) and Defendants’ Response thereto (Doc. 113). For the reasons stated herein, the Motion is due to be DENIED. In short, the Court agrees with the reasoning of the court in Kadiyala v. Pupke, No. 17-80732-CIV-Marra/Matthewman, 2019 WL 3752654 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 8, 2019), and a number of other cases cited by Defendants. See Northstar Moving Holding Co. v. King David Van Lines, No. 19-62176-CIV-DIMITROULEAS/SNOW, 2021 WL 9794638 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 27, 2021); Silver Streak Trailer Co., LLC v. Thor Industries, Inc., No. 18-14126-CIV-ROSENBERG/MAYNARD, 2018 WL 8367073 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 15, 2018); Travelers Prop. Casualty Co. of Am. v. Charlotte Pipe & Foundry Co., No. 6:11-cv-19-Orl-28GJK, 2012 WL 13236896 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 10, 2012); Jeld-Wen, Inc. v. Nebula Glass Int'l, Inc., No. 05-60860-CIV, 2007 WL 1526649 (S.D. Fla. May 22, 2007). As the court stated in Kadiyala: “The settlement agreement and related documents are relevant to damages, and specifically relevant to setoff. The documents sought are relevant for impeachment purposes, and they are producible under Rule 26(b)(1). Plaintiff has failed to show good cause or some other sound reason for prohibiting disclosure.” Kadiyala, 2019 WL 3752654, at *3. That reasoning is largely applicable here. The Court finds distinguishable and/or not persuasive the cases that Plaintiff cites to the contrary. Finally, the Court finds no reason for an in camera review of the subject settlement agreement. Accordingly, it is ORDERED: The Motion (Doc. 112) is DENIED. DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida, on May 16, 2023.
fo-X £B. ae
JOZL B. TOOMEY
United States Magistrate Judge Copies to: Counsel of Record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Result Mktg. Grp., Ltd. v. Se. Grocers, Inc., 2019 WL 3752654 (M.D. Fla. 2023)…. Sept. 27, 2021); Silver Streak Trailer Co., LLC v. Thor Industries, Inc., No. 18-14126-CIV-ROSENBERG/MAYNARD, 2018 WL 8367073 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 15, 2018); Travelers Prop. Casualty Co. of Am. v. Charlotte Pipe & Foundry Co., No. 6:11-cv-19-Orl-28GJK, 2012 WL 13236896 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 10, 2012); Jeld-Wen, Inc. v. Nebula Glass Int'l, Inc., No. 05-60860-CIV, 2007 WL 1526649 (S.D. Fla. May 22, 2007). As the court stated in Kadiyala: “The settlement agreement and related documents are relevant…1 / 5
-
Westbrook v. Cap. One Bank (USA), N.A. (M.D. Fla. 2024)…0477-MSS-UAM Document 60 Filed 03/07/24 Page 4 of 5 PageID 581 To the extent that Mr. Westbrook argues the settlement agreements are confidential and not subject to discovery production, the court disagrees. See Kadiyala v. Pupke, No. 17-80732-CIV, 2019 WL 3752654 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 8, 2019) (reviewing cases and finding no privilege protecting settlement agreements from disclosure); In re Denture Cream Prods. Liab. Litig., No. 09- 2051-MD, 2011 WL 1979666, at *5 (S.D. Fla. May 20, 2011) (“There is nothing magica…
-
Wyndham Vacation Resorts Inc. v. DVD II Grp., LLC (M.D. Fla. 2023)…n the court ordered production of the settlement agreement between the plaintiff and a former defendant in the same case, finding it was “relevant to the issues of bias and potential damages,” including set-off. No. 19- 62176-CIV-DIMITROULEAS/SNOW, 2021 WL 9794638, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 27, 2021). Moreover, the court ordered the production of the settlement agreement prior to the entry of a final judgment. Id.; accord Pitt v. Hilton Grand Vacations Inc., No. 6:22- cv-139-PGB-LHP, 2022 WL 17251510, at *3 n.2…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Result Mktg. Grp., Ltd. v. Se. Grocers, Inc., 2019 WL 3752654 (M.D. Fla. 2023)