2:24-cv-01347•Thompson v. Westinghouse Electric Company LLC
Full text
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LISA THOMPSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) CIVIL ACTION NO.: 24-01347 ) v. ) ) ) JUDGE: GREG G. GUIDRY ) WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC ) MAGISTRATE: MICHAEL B. COMPANY, LLC, ) NORTH ) Defendant. ) ORDER AND REASONS Having considered the Objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Order (R. Doc. 63), and Defendant's response thereto (R. Doc. 67); IT IS ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED. The Magistrate Judge determined that Plaintiff's Motion to Compel was untimely (R. Doc. 53), and, on motion for reconsideration, the Magistrate Judge reiterated its initial determination and also found that the document labeled as WESTINGHOUSE_000270 was privileged, such that the claw back request was proper. (R. Doc. 62). Applying a clearly erroneous standard of review of a non-dispositive, pretrial motion, such as a motion to compel, the Court finds no clear error in the Magistrate Judge's ruling. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a); Castillo v. Frank, 70 F.3d 382 (5th Cir. 1995). The Court finds no merit to Plaintiff's argument that Defendant waived its right to assert privilege over the attorney-client work product when it inadvertently produced the document. New Orleans, Louisiana, this ______ day of ________________, 2026. _________________________________ JUDGE GREG GERARD GUIDRY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 30th March Case 2:24-cv-01347-GGG-MBN Document 74 Filed 03/30/26 Page 1 of 1
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.