Filed: May 12, 2016
Latest Update: May 12, 2016
Summary: RULING ON APPEAL JAMES J. BRADY , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on appeal (Docs. 558) taken by defendants, Stifel Financial Corporation, Stifel Nicolaus & Co., Stone & Youngberg, LLC, and Anthony Guaimano (collectively, the "S&Y Parties"), from the ruling of the magistrate judge issued on May 6, 2016. The matter has been briefed and there is no need for oral argument. It is well established that magistrate judges are afforded broad discretion in resolving discovery disp
Summary: RULING ON APPEAL JAMES J. BRADY , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on appeal (Docs. 558) taken by defendants, Stifel Financial Corporation, Stifel Nicolaus & Co., Stone & Youngberg, LLC, and Anthony Guaimano (collectively, the "S&Y Parties"), from the ruling of the magistrate judge issued on May 6, 2016. The matter has been briefed and there is no need for oral argument. It is well established that magistrate judges are afforded broad discretion in resolving discovery dispu..
More
RULING ON APPEAL
JAMES J. BRADY, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on appeal (Docs. 558) taken by defendants, Stifel Financial Corporation, Stifel Nicolaus & Co., Stone & Youngberg, LLC, and Anthony Guaimano (collectively, the "S&Y Parties"), from the ruling of the magistrate judge issued on May 6, 2016. The matter has been briefed and there is no need for oral argument.
It is well established that magistrate judges are afforded broad discretion in resolving discovery disputes. Merritt v. Int'l Bro. of Boilermakers, 649 F.2d 1013 (5th Cir. 1981). Rulings on discovery matters will be overturned only when found to be clearly erroneous or an abuse of discretion. This appeal (Doc. 558) involves the application of federal or state law to waiver of privilege for untimely logging such a privilege. After carefully reviewing this matter, the Court finds no error of law or abuse of discretion.
Accordingly, the ruling of the magistrate judge dated May 6, 2016 is hereby AFFIRMED.
As per this Court's Order (Doc. 549), the defendants must comply with the magistrate judge's ruling by noon on Friday, May, 13, 2016.
