Newmark Realty Capital, Inc. v. BGC Partners, Inc., 16-cv-01702-BLF (SVK). (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20180605880
Visitors: 2
Filed: Jun. 04, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 04, 2018
Summary: ORDER ON CHRIS CARAS' REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ORDER REGARDING PRODUCTION OF CBRE EMAILS BECAUSE OF CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES Re: Dkt. No. 396 SUSAN VAN KEULEN , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is non-party Chris Caras's request to be relieved from that portion of the Court's May 9, 2018 Order on Joint Statement re Subpoenas to Non-Parties Chris Caras and Paracore, LLC (ECF 350) that required Mr. Caras to produce his CBRE work emails regarding Defendants or the subject litigation dated fr
Summary: ORDER ON CHRIS CARAS' REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ORDER REGARDING PRODUCTION OF CBRE EMAILS BECAUSE OF CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES Re: Dkt. No. 396 SUSAN VAN KEULEN , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is non-party Chris Caras's request to be relieved from that portion of the Court's May 9, 2018 Order on Joint Statement re Subpoenas to Non-Parties Chris Caras and Paracore, LLC (ECF 350) that required Mr. Caras to produce his CBRE work emails regarding Defendants or the subject litigation dated fro..
More
ORDER ON CHRIS CARAS' REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM ORDER REGARDING PRODUCTION OF CBRE EMAILS BECAUSE OF CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES
Re: Dkt. No. 396
SUSAN VAN KEULEN, Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court is non-party Chris Caras's request to be relieved from that portion of the Court's May 9, 2018 Order on Joint Statement re Subpoenas to Non-Parties Chris Caras and Paracore, LLC (ECF 350) that required Mr. Caras to produce his CBRE work emails regarding Defendants or the subject litigation dated from January 1, 2017. ECF 396. Mr. Caras asserts that CBRE has taken the position that his CBRE emails are the property of CBRE and that he does not have permission to produce them. Id. Defendants oppose Mr. Caras's request on various grounds. ECF 403. Defendants propose that as an alternative to requiring Mr. Caras or CBRE to produce the disputed emails, the Court could order Plaintiff 1 to produce communications with Mr. Caras regarding Defendants or this case between January 1, 2017 and the present. Defendants further request an order directing Plaintiff and Mr. Caras to provide certain assurances concerning the completeness of Plaintiff's production. Id.
After considering the parties' submissions, the Court ORDERS that as an alternative to requiring Mr. Caras to produce his CBRE emails or granting Defendants leave to serve a document subpoena on CBRE, by June 8, 2018, Plaintiff must produce all documents, including emails from any account, reflecting communications between Mr. Caras and Plaintiff or its counsel regarding Defendants or the subject litigation from the period January 1, 2017 to present. In the particular circumstances applicable to these documents, the Court does not find the additional assurances requested by Defendants necessary; the Court relies on the compliance of Plaintiff and its counsel with their duties and obligations in connection with this litigation.
SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Defendants acknowledge that Plaintiff's counsel has already produced its communications with Mr. Caras. ECF 403 at 1 n.1.
Source: Leagle