In re Cooper Tire & Rubber Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
568 F.3d 1180 (10th Cir. 2009)
Plaintiffs injured when a Cooper Tire (defendant) tire's tread separated sued Cooper and DaimlerChrysler for strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty, alleging Cooper knew or should have known its tires were prone to separation but failed to redesign or warn; Cooper sought a protective order limiting discovery to the specific tire type, manufacturing plant, and a reasonable surrounding time period, but the magistrate judge denied the protective order and compelled broader discovery, which the district court affirmed. Cooper sought a writ of mandamus, arguing the district court failed to properly apply Rule 26(b).
Whether good cause is required for demanding discovery not related to a claim or defense of a party.