Dawn Lane (Raleigh) recently obtained a favorable decision on a Motion for Reconsideration in an uninsured claim in which claimant sustained multiple injuries after being hit by a car in a parking lot. Our client was named as a defendant under the “piercing of the corporate veil” theory. Defendant responded to Plaintiff’s initial set of discovery requests, but objected to producing his financial statements. Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel seeking an Order compelling defendant produce his financial statements, including tax records. Within just 4 days, the IC inadvertently issued an Order allowing plaintiff’s motion to compel without allowing defendant his ten days to respond. Defendant immediately filed a response which argued that his financial records are irrelevant and an invasion of his privacy as he was not an employee of the named defendant-employer. In addition, defendant filed a Motion for Reconsideration as to the Order allowing plaintiff’s Motion to compel. As a result, the IC issued a modified Order allowing defendant to produce redacted financial statements only.
The outcome of a particular case cannot be predicated upon a lawyer's or law firm's past results.