Cummings v. General Motors Corp.
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
365 F.3d 944 (10th Cir. 2004)
Relevant factsFree
Cummings (plaintiff) was paralyzed in a car accident and sued GM (defendant) alleging a seat and seatbelt defect; after a jury found for GM based partly on its theory that Cummings had reclined her seat, Cummings discovered videos from an unrelated GM trial that allegedly showed her seat couldn't have been reclined, and she sought relief under Rule 60(b), arguing the videos fell within her prior discovery requests, but the district court denied the motion as untimely and unsupported.
IssueFree
Whether a party is required to automatically produce any document relevant to the disputed facts at issue in the case.
Related cases
Rozier v. Ford Motor Co.573 F.2d 1332 (5th Cir. 1978)State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Century Home Components550 P.2d 1185 (1976)International Business Machines Corp. v. Edelstein526 F.2d 37 (2d Cir. 1975)Qualcomm Inc. v. Broadcom Corp.2008 WL 66932 (S.D.Cal Jan. 7, 2008)Conway v. Chemical Leaman Tank Lines, Inc.687 F.2d 108 (1982)