669 F.2d 620 (10th Cir. 1982), 80-1978, In re Coordinated Pretrial Proceedings in Petroleum Products Antitrust Litigation

Docket Nº:80-1978.
Citation:669 F.2d 620
Party Name:In re COORDINATED PRETRIAL PROCEEDINGS IN PETROLEUM PRODUCTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION. The STATE OF FLORIDA, on behalf of itself and its public entities and residents, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. KERR-McGEE CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.
Case Date:January 21, 1982
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 620

669 F.2d 620 (10th Cir. 1982)

In re COORDINATED PRETRIAL PROCEEDINGS IN PETROLEUM PRODUCTS ANTITRUST

LITIGATION. The STATE OF FLORIDA, on behalf of itself and

its public entities and residents, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

KERR-McGEE CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 80-1978.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

January 21, 1982

Argued and Submitted Oct. 1, 1981.

Page 621

Jerome W. Hoffman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Fla. (Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Bill L. Bryant, Jr., and Larry H. Evans, Asst. Attys. Gen., The Dept. of Legal Affairs, Antitrust Section, Tallahassee, Fla., and Stephen L. Dunne, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., of Jones & Dunne, San Diego, Cal., with him on the brief), for plaintiffs-appellants.

Annita M. Bridges, Oklahoma City, Okl., for Kerr-McGee Corp., defendant-appellee.

Before McWILLIAMS, BARRETT and SEYMOUR, Circuit Judges.

McWILLIAMS, Circuit Judge.

Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c), 1 the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma entered a protective order wherein it decreed that discovery, requested of a nonparty by a plaintiff in a multidistrict antitrust litigation, be conditioned upon payment of discovery costs incurred by the nonparty. Specifically, the order provided that the production of documents by Kerr-McGee Corporation pursuant

Page 622

to the State of Florida's subpoena duces tecum should be conditioned upon the payment by Florida of $8,782.98 to Kerr-McGee as expenses for such production. Florida now appeals from this order, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1976). We affirm.

Florida is the plaintiff in an antitrust action brought against several major oil companies. Florida v. Exxon Corp., No. 73-112-CIV-T (N.D.Fla., filed July 9, 1973) and No. CV 76-2840 WPG (C.D.Cal.). Florida's suit alleges that the defendant oil companies have conspired to fix the prices of petroleum products, to create an artificial scarcity of petroleum products and to monopolize the petroleum industry. The Florida case has been consolidated with similar suits, brought by other states, for coordinated pretrial proceedings in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Petroleum Products Antitrust Litigation, MDL Docket No. 150 WPG (C.D.Cal.). Kerr-McGee is not a party to this antitrust action brought by Florida and certain other states. Discovery against nonparties has been authorized by order of the California judge supervising the coordinated pretrial proceedings, however.

On August 7, 1979, Florida caused a notice of deposition and subpoena duces tecum to be served on Kerr-McGee, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 45(d). The subpoena requested the production of certain documents relating to the purchase, refining, and marketing of crude oil and petroleum products by Kerr-McGee during the years 1970 through 1973. The subpoena duces tecum consisted of eighteen pages, with thirteen categories of documents, and it sought information from Kerr-McGee and all of its...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP