Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Walters v. Dollar General Corp.

United States District Court, D. Kansas

May 28, 2019

JANE WALTERS, Plaintiff,

          Matthew L. Bretz BRETZ & YOUNG, LLC Attorney for Plaintiff

          G. Andrew Marino, Justen P. Phelps, GIBSON WATSON MARINO LLC Attorneys for Defendants


          James P. O'Hara, U.S. Magistrate Judge.

         The parties agree during the course of discovery it may be necessary to disclose certain confidential information relating to the subject matter of this action. They agree certain categories of such information should be treated as confidential, protected from disclosure outside this litigation, and used only for purposes of prosecuting or defending this action and any appeals. The parties jointly request entry of a protective order to limit the disclosure, dissemination, and use of certain identified categories of confidential information.

         The parties assert in support of their request that protection of the identified categories of confidential information is necessary because Plaintiff, in furtherance of her claim for punitive damages, seeks discovery of information related to personal injury claimants, internally developed company policies and procedures, proprietary information or software, and other commercial information that the Defendants maintain confidentially as part of their course of business.

         For good cause shown under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c), the court grants the parties' joint request and hereby enters the following Protective Order:

         1. Scope.

         All documents and materials produced in the course of discovery of this case, including initial disclosures, responses to discovery requests, all deposition testimony and exhibits, and information derived directly therefrom (hereinafter, collectively, “documents”), are subject to this Order concerning Confidential Information as set forth below. As there is a presumption in favor of open and public judicial proceedings in the federal courts, this Order will be strictly construed in favor of public disclosure and open proceedings wherever possible.

         2. Definition of Confidential Information.

         As used in this Order, "Confidential information" is defined as information that the producing party designates in good faith has been previously maintained in a confidential manner and should be protected from disclosure and use outside the litigation because its disclosure and use are restricted by statute or could potentially cause harm to the interests of the disclosing party or nonparties. For purposes of this Order, the parties will limit their designation of “Confidential Information” to the following categories of information or documents:

A. Internal administrative and business policies, procedures or practices.
B. Information concerning practices and procedures related to internal correspondence or documentation at Defendants' stores and any related internal investigations.
C. Information concerning practices and procedures related to maintenance requests and implementation at Defendants' stores; D. Information related to the training of employees, including but not limited to that which deals with employee and customer safety.
E. Construction, architectural or other drawings or diagrams of stores.
F. Medical records, or associated medical information, or other personal identifying information maintained by Defendants by any personal injury or worker's compensation claimants other than Plaintiff; G. Software used in conjunction with business policies, procedures or practices, including those outlined in (A), (B), (C), (D), and (E).
H. Defendants' financial information related to profits, losses, revenue and expenses; I. Surveillance video captured by Defendants within their stores; J. Other documents produced in the future which may require protection under this Order.

         Information or documents that are available to the public may not be designated as Confidential Information.

         3. Form and Timing of Designation.

         The producing party may designate documents as containing Confidential Information and therefore subject to protection under this Order by marking or placing the words “CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER” (hereinafter, “the marking”) on the document and on all copies in a manner that will not interfere with the legibility of the document. As used in this Order, “copies” includes electronic images, duplicates, extracts, summaries, or descriptions that contain the Confidential Information. The marking will be applied prior to or at the time the documents are produced or disclosed. Applying the marking to a document does not mean that the document has any status or protection by statute or otherwise except to the extent and for the purposes of this Order. Copies that are made of any designated documents must also bear the marking, except that indices, electronic databases, or lists of documents that do not contain substantial portions or images of the text of marked documents and do not otherwise disclose the substance of the Confidential Information are not required to be marked. By marking a designated document as confidential, the designating attorney or party appearing pro se thereby certifies that the document contains Confidential Information as defined in this Order.

         4. Inadvertent ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.