In re Shell Oil Refinery
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana
132 F.R.D. 437 (E.D. La. 1990)
Relevant factsFree
After a catalytic cracking unit explosion at Shell's refinery, plaintiffs sued and sought to depose Shell's in-house employees R.E. Nordstrom and Paul Nelson, who had conducted post-explosion tests specifically to assist Shell in the litigation; the plaintiffs claimed it would cost up to $300,000 for their own experts to conduct comparable tests, arguing this expense justified compelling discovery from Shell's employees.
IssueFree
Whether the rule limiting discovery of non-testifying experts retained or specially employed in anticipation of litigation to exceptional circumstances applies to a party's own in-house employees performing that same function.
Related cases
Chiquita International v. M/V Bolero Reefer1994 WL 641742 (S.D.N.Y. 1994)Coates v. AC & S, Inc.133 F.R.D. 109 (E.D. La. 1990)Thompson v. The Haskell Co.65 F. Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1088 (1994)House v. Combined Ins. Co. of America168 F.R.D. 236 (N.D. Iowa 1996)Thompson v. Department of Housing and Urban Devel.199 F.R.D. 168 (D. Md. 2001)