No. 18-1453

Mitra Rangarajan v. Johns Hopkins University, et al.

Lower Court: Fourth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-05-22
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: attorney-misconduct attorney-responsibility circuit-split civil-procedure discovery discovery-violations dismissal federal-civil-procedure federal-procedure prejudice rule-37 sanctions warning
Key Terms:
DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2019-06-20
Question Presented (AI Summary)

When is it appropriate to dismiss an action for discovery violations under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Before this Honorable Court is the question of when it is appropriate to dismiss an action for discovery violations under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, in light of the split in practice among federal circuits. Relatedly, the following sub-questions are also before the Court: 1) Whether an action can be dismissed for discovery violations for which a representing attorney alone is responsible. 2) Whether the discovery violations must prejudice the other side, and to what extent, for dismissal to qualify as an appropriate sanction. 3) Whether a warning that dismissal is possible is a prerequisite for dismissal as a sanction for discovery violations.

Docket Entries

2019-06-24
Petition DENIED.
2019-06-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/20/2019.
2019-05-22
Waiver of right of respondents Johns Hopkins University, et al. to respond filed.
2019-05-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 21, 2019)

Attorneys

Johns Hopkins University, et al.
Robert Thomas SmithKatten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Respondent
Mitra Rangarajan
Cary Johnson Hansel IIIHansel Law, P.C., Petitioner