Opinion ID: 409582
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Dismissal of four plaintiffs for failure to make discovery

Text: 33 All plaintiffs were served with some 240 interrogatories by the defendants in late 1976. 48 These interrogatories sought, inter alia, information about plaintiffs' political activities, the factual bases of the allegations contained in the complaint, the injuries sustained by plaintiffs, and the damages sought. After several stipulated time extensions, plaintiffs objected to the vast majority of the interrogatories. 49 Two of the organizational plaintiffs ultimately dismissed filed timely answers to those relatively few interrogatories to which they did not object. The defendants then filed a motion to compel. 34 In July 1977, the court entered an order ruling on plaintiffs' objections and incorporating certain agreements as to the interrogatories that the parties had reached at the urging of the court. The court rejected plaintiffs' objections based on the presence of information in public reports and many of the objections to relevance. It deferred plaintiffs' obligation to answer questions relating to damages, plaintiffs' legal theories, and areas covered by the attorney-client privilege until plaintiffs had made further discovery. Plaintiffs were given 14 days in which to answer the remaining interrogatories or the claims asserted by such plaintiffs shall be dismissed with prejudice. 50 35 Plaintiffs failed to comply with that deadline, and were granted an extension of time to August 18, 1977. The order extending the time for filing stated that upon failure to file timely answers, this court will entertain briefs on the issue of what sanctions, if any, should be imposed .... 51 Appellants Cora Weiss, American Friends Service Committee, Clergy and Laity Concerned, and Institute for Policy Studies failed to file their answers by August 18; a motion for further extension was denied. After a hearing, the court on May 24, 1978 granted CIA's motion to dismiss the noncomplying plaintiffs. Plaintiffs' motion in the interim for discovery sanctions against defendants based on similar lapses was denied.