Hill v. Doughty
Hill v. Doughty
Opinion of the Court
The respondent in these related certio-rari proceedings,
We deny the petitions insofar as the orders allow discovery of financial information regarding the party-petitioner Hill, as Hill has failed to establish that the lower court departed from the essential requirements of law. However, we grant the writs of certiorari and quash the orders at issue insofar as the lower court permitted discovery concerning the non-party petitioners’ financial records. The court departed from the essential requirements of law in allowing such discovery, because at the time the lower court considered and denied the motions for protective order and to quash the subpoenas, there was no evidence to support Doughty’s allegation of a relationship between the non-party petitioners and the judgment debtor Hill.
. We sua sponte consolidate case numbers 98-2758 and 98-2833.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Robert J. HILL, MTLC Investment, Ltd., MTLC Management Corp., PPC Products Corp., Semmiconductors, Inc., Hill Development Co., Ltd., and RJH Management Corp. v. Andrew DOUGHTY d/b/a A.D. Resources, Respondent Robert J. Hill, MTLC Investment, Ltd., MTLC Management Corp., PPC Products Corp., Technett Seals, Inc., Semmiconductors, Inc., Mindy M. Weiss, Lauril L. Stough, Tamara Jo Vaudreuil, Connie Sue Hill, and Peggy J. Hill a/k/a Margaret J. Hill v. Andrew Doughty d/b/a A.D. Resources
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published