NHCaseLaw.com

In this civil action, the plaintiff, MBNA America Bank, NA ("MBNA"), sought to enforce an arbitration award against the defendant, Troy T. Cornock ("the defendant"). On March 20, 2007, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant and found that the arbitration award was unenforceable as a matter of law. However, the defendant has filed multiple counterclaims against MBNA which require resolution. Presently before the Court are the defendant's: (1) Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and for Sanctions; (2) Motion to Compel Production of Documents; and (3) Motion to Add Additional Cross Party Plaintiff. MBNA objects to all the motions. The Court held a hearing on the matter on May 3, 2007. After consideration of the pleadings, argument, and applicable law, the Court finds and rules as follows.

NOW COMES the defendant, Donald Laro, by his attorneys, Wiggin & Nourie, P.A., and files this objection to plaintiffs' motion to compel, and states as follows:

Hearing was held on September 7, 1994 with regard to various pending motions. Present were Attorney Richard Inglis, representing the Estate of Infantine; Attorney Richard A. Mitchell, representing Fleet Bank of New Hampshire; Attorneys Emily G. Rice and John T. Broderick, representing Fleet Bank of New Hampshire; Attorney Charles Douglas, III, representing Robert Audley; Attorney Timothy Sheedy, representing Robert H. Brooks; Attorney William S. Gannon, representing Robert Brooks, R. Scott Brooks, HABS/CDM, Inc. and RSA Corp. and R. Scott Brooks, pro se, representing ABI Corp. The Court has reviewed and addressed the following pending motions.

The plaintiff seeks an order compelling disclosure of documents from the file of Ms. Campion, an expert witness disclosed by the defendants and deposed by the plaintiff on December 9, 2004. At that deposition, counsel for the defendants removed documents from Ms. Campion's file prior to disclosure of the file to counsel for the plaintiff. Those documents included notes written by Ms. Campion. It is disclosure of those notes which the plaintiff seeks.

At issue in plaintiffs' motion to compel are various documents that plaintiffs had sought from defendant New Hampshire Republican State Committee ("NHRSC") during discovery in this civil action. In earlier proceedings, the Court had entered various discovery orders. Plaintiffs assert that NHRSC has failed to comply with the discovery orders as entered by the Court. The items which presently appear to constitute the central focus of the plaintiffs' motion concern a report arising from an investigation of the underlying telephone jamming issues that had been conducted by legal counsel for defendant NHRSC, and its supporting documents. Counsel for NHRSC submits that the material at issue is protected by the attorney-client privilege as well as the attorney work-product privilege.