Judge overseing 3M v. Boulter suit orders 3M to file “substantive response” to anti-SLAPP Motion

The judge presiding over the 3M v. Boulter case today issued an order denying the 3M cross-motion for discovery and ordering it to file a “substantive response” to the anti-SLAPP motion filed by the Davis defendants. The Order states that, “[i]f in opposing the Special Motion, Plaintiff contends that the Court should not grant the Special Motion without allowing Plaintiff the opportunity to take discovery, Plaintiff must set forth with particularity and specify precisely what targeted topics and/or categories of discovery it needs to defeat the Special Motion, as well as what that discovery will likely show.”

Under the DC anti-SLAPP statute, the filing of the special motion to dismiss stays discovery unless the court finds, and orders, that targeted discovery will enable the plaintiff to defeat the motion and that discovery would not be unduly burdensome. DC Code § 16-5502(c). The order may be conditioned on the plaintiff paying any expenses incurred by the defendant in responding to such discovery.  Id.

The same order granted a motion to intervene filed by the DC Attorney General.

Leslie Machado

About: Leslie Machado

Mr. Machado counsels and advises a diverse range of clients on various areas of law. He is also an experienced litigator, having tried cases to verdict in state and federal courts. View all posts by Leslie Machado
This entry was posted in General and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!