Robertson v. People Magazine(2015)Facts: Robertson (Plaintiff) was senior editor at People Magazine (Defendant). Robertson wasterminated due to a “purported workforce restructuring.” Thereafter, Plaintiff claimed that she hadbeen discriminated against, due to her race, by a superior. Plaintiff claims that her superior“hindered her ability to succeed.” Plaintiff also alleges that she was replaced by a less qualifiedwhite employee. As a part of discovery, Plaintiff submitted 135 document requests; for example, sherequested documents “concerninganyof People Magazine’s regular meetings.” Defendant arguedthat the document request were irrelevant, burdensome, and subject to editorial privilege.Issue: Whether document requests as a part of discovery, calling “nearly unlimited access” toeditorial files, are disproportionate and burdensome.Holding and Rule: Yes. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 – i.e., Rule 26(b)(1) –, as amended in2015, requires that discovery be “proportionalto the needs of the case” and associated with“relevantinformation.” In interest of inexpensive determination, the burden of the proposeddiscovery must not outweigh the likely benefit.Analysis“Parties may obtain discovery regarding anynonprivileged matter that isrelevant to any party'sclaim or defense andproportional to the needs of the case”In discrimination casesdiscovery is addressed toallegedly discriminatory conduct and/orcommentsPlaintiff’s discover requests areburdensomeanddisproportionateo“Plaintiff here seeks nearly unlimited access to People’s editorial files, including alldocuments covering themental processof People staff”
