- Joined
- Oct 10, 2006
- Messages
- 76,883
- Reaction score
- 66,866
Do you find it a bit odd that this lawyer opines that Brady's ability to prevail 'predominantly' relies on discovery without ever defining the legal issues for which discovery might be sought?
The discovery tools described are a nice summary of civil procedure. I would give his opinion a little more weight if he actually described a legal theory for the civil complaint before offering what appears to be no more than general rules of civil litigation and the value of discovery to the typical case. That tends to be true when the issues are broader, typical of general civil claims anticipating a full trial. In arbitration reviews, there may be little or no discovery. I will be very interested to see if any non-arbitration theories are advanced, and if so how they can avoid a motion to dismiss in order to see discovery at all (if I were the NFL, I would move to stay any and all discovery until the motion to dismiss were decided, citing as good cause the general principles favoring deference to arbitration).
Discovery tools and standards are tethered to claims and defenses. All of these tools have counter-tools, and even a neophyte litigator knows how to shut down a discovery fishing expedition. They are called objections and motions to quash.
I agree with you. However, we're stuck pointing out the little points that people are getting right, because so few of them have been consistently good.