Skip to main content

Main navigation

  • Documents
  • Search

User account menu

  • Log in
Home
Nashua City Data

Breadcrumb

  1. Home
  2. Board Of Aldermen - Minutes - 10/12/2021 - P44

Board Of Aldermen - Minutes - 10/12/2021 - P44

By dnadmin on Mon, 11/07/2022 - 07:07
Document Date
Tue, 10/12/2021 - 00:00
Meeting Description
Board Of Aldermen
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
Tue, 10/12/2021 - 00:00
Page Number
44
Image URL
https://nashuameetingsstorage.blob.core.windows.net/nm-docs-pages/boa_m__101220…

(Id. 1 34.) Accordingly, the plaintiff asks “[t]nat the [C]ity be ordered to pay plaintiff's
attorney's fees associated with her attempt to obtain discovery of the emails in
question.” (Id. at Prayer 5.)!

The purpose of discovery “is to narrow the issues of litigation and to prevent
unfair surprise by making evidence available for both parties to evaluate it and
adequately prepare for trial.” Bursey v. Bursey, 145 N.H. 283, 286 (2000). Accordingly,
“(t]he [CJourt may impose appropriate sanctions against a party or counsel for engaging
in discovery abuse.” N.H. Super. Ct. R. 21(d}(1); see also Daigle v. City of Portsmouth,
131 N.H. 319, 325 (1988) (“The imposition of discovery sanctions is a matter left largely
to the discretion of the trial court.”). “Sanctions are appropriate in part to deter parties
from disregarding discovery requests, and to compensate others for costs associated
with a party's failure to act in accordance with such requests.” Daigle, 131 N.H. at 326
(cleaned up). “Action or inaction by a party may provide the basis for the imposition of
sanctions.” Id. “Upon a finding that discovery abuse has occurred, the court should
normally impose sanctions unless the offending party or counsel can demonstrate
substantial justification for the conduct at issue or other circumstances that would make
the imposition of sanctions unfair.” N.H. Super. Ct. R. 21(d)(1).

Here, it is undisputed that the City first informed the plaintiff that the requested
files were unavailable due to the corruption of the tape backups nine months after her
initial request. During this time, the plaintiff relied on the City’s statements that it was
“still searching” and would produce responsive documents. Moreover, the City’s lack of

candor, or lack of action to discover the corruption of the files, led the plaintiff to file a

1 tn her motion, the plaintiff asked for addition relief, however, during the hearing, the plaintiff withdrew her
additional prayers for relief. (Hir'g at 10:18--19.)

Ortolano v. The City of Nashua / 2020-CV-00133
3

Page Image
Board Of Aldermen - Minutes - 10/12/2021 - P44

Footer menu

  • Contact