Document: 49 L.Ed.2d 747 96 S.Ct. 2778 427 U.S. 639 NATIONAL HOCKEY LEAGUE et al.v.METROPOLITAN CLUB, INC., al. No. 75-1558. June 30, 1976. Rehearing Denied Oct. 4, See 429 874, 97 197. PER CURIAM. 1 This case arises out of the dismissal, under Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 37, respondents' antitrust action against petitioners for failure to timely answer written interrogatories as ordered by District Court, 63 F.R.D. 641. The Court Appeals Third Circuit reversed judgment finding that had abused its discretion, 531 F.2d 1188. question presented is whether was correct in so concluding. Rule 37 provides pertinent part follows: 2 "If a party . fails obey an order provide or permit discovery court which pending may make such orders regard are just, and among others following: 3 (C) An striking pleadings parts thereof, staying further proceedings until obeyed, dismissing proceeding any rendering default disobedient party." 4 held Societe Internationale v. Rogers, 357 197, 212, 78 1087, 1096, 1255 (1958), 5 "should not be construed authorize dismissal (a) complaint because petitioner's noncompliance with pretrial production when it has been established comply due inability, willfulness, bad faith, fault petitioner." 6 While there have amendments since decision neither parties, nor suggested changes would affect teachings quoted language from decision. 7 memorandum opinion directing dismissed, summarized factual history these words: 8 "After seventeen months where crucial remained substantially unanswered despite numerous extensions granted at eleventh hour and, many instances, beyond hour, notwithstanding several admonitions promises commitments plaintiffs, must does conclude conduct plaintiffs demonstrates callous disregard responsibilities counsel owe their opponents. practices exemplify flagrant faith after being expressly directed perform act date certain, Viz., 14, 1974, they failed compounded waiting five days afterwards before filed motions. 9 Moreover, this taken face warnings certain information could result imposition sancons Fed.R.Civ.P. 37. If sanction warranted circumstances case, then can envisage no set facts whereby should ever applied." 641, 656 (1974). 10 Appeals, reversing divided vote stated: 11 carefully reviewing record, we insufficient evidence support M-GB's file supplemental answers 1974 willful intentional." 1188, 1195 (1976). 12 did findings historical fact made but simply concluded record "extenuating factors." emphasized none parties really pressed consent decree entered between all other original except respondents approximately one year commencement litigation. It also noted took over litigation, previously managed another attorney, entry decree, encountered difficulties obtaining some requested information. referred colloquy during oral argument on petitioners' motion dismiss lead assured he knowingly willfully final deadline. 13 stated required consider full determing orders, see Link Wabash R. Co., 370 626, 633-634, 82 1386, 1390, 734 (1962), think comprehensive supporting indicates just that. That shows extremely patient efforts allow ample time orders. Not only fail responses time, ultimately were found grossly inadequate. 14 question, course, matter dismissed action; discretion doing. E. g., C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice Procedure: Civil § 2284, p. 765 (1970); General Dynamics Corp. Selb Mfg. 481 1204, 1211 (CA8 1973); Baker F Investment, 470 778, 781 (CA2 1972). Certainly contained earlier fully supported record. We lenity evidenced while certainly significant factor considering sanctions cannot allowed wholly supplant equally necessary considerations embodied Rule. 15 There natural tendency courts, properly employing benefit hindsight, heavily influenced severity outright order. quite reasonable who subjected will feel duly chastened, even though succeeds having appeal nonetheless promptly future district court. 16 But here, areas law, most severe spectrum provided statute rule available appropriate cases, merely penalize those whose deemed warrant sanction, deter might tempted absence deterrent. undisturbed well These faithfully case. lawsuits freer than contemplates flout courts. Under hold Judge abuse his respondents, concluding extreme reason "flagrant faith" counsel's "callous disregard" responsibilities. Therefore, petition writ certiorari reversed. 17 So ordered. 18 Mr. Justice BRENNAN WHITE dissent. 19 STEVENS consideration

Category: 8