Ex parte Guerdon Industries, Inc.
| Decision Date | 20 July 1979 |
| Citation | 373 So.2d 322 |
| Parties | Ex parte Guerdon Industries, Inc., et al. In re Mrs. Betty Marshall et al. v. Guerdon Industries, Inc., et al. 78-56. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
W. F. Horsley of Samford, Denson, Horsley & Pettey, Opelika, for petitioner, Guerdon Industries, Inc.
Hill, Hill, Carter, Franco, Cole & Black, H. E. Nix, Jr., Montgomery, for petitioner, Diversified Financial Corporation.
Hoyt W. Hill of Walker, Hill, Adams, Umbach & Herndon, Opelika, for respondents.
Petitioners, Guerdon Industries, Inc., and Diversified Financial Corporation, petition this court to issue an original writ of mandamus requiring the Honorable G. H. Wright, Jr., Judge of the Court of Lee County, to order the Lee County Juvenile Court, the Lee County Department of Pensions and Security, the Opelika Police Department, and the East Alabama Comprehensive Mental Health Center, to furnish to petitioners all files and records pertaining to a juvenile investigation and proceeding concerning a minor child (we omit the name), and to answer all questions regarding the investigation of that minor. We deny the petition.
Petitioners are the manufacturer-distributor and retail vendor, respectively, of a mobile home which caught fire and burned. As a result, plaintiffs, Mrs. Betty Marshall, et al., filed seven suits against petitioners claiming almost five million dollars in damages for wrongful deaths and personal injuries. The issue is whether the trial judge abused his discretion by refusing to allow petitioners to obtain through discovery, records and information concerning a juvenile proceeding and investigation of a minor child who was in the mobile home when it burned. At the time of the fire in question the minor was 14 years of age. The minor is not a party to any of the lawsuits in question, and no claim or suit has been filed against the minor by either of petitioners. The trial judge was given no indication from any party that the minor will be called as a witness in the trial of any of the cases.
We find the trial judge did not abuse his discretion by issuing a protective order denying petitioners access to the records and information concerning the juvenile proceeding and investigation of the minor.
Diversified Financial Corporation filed a request for a Subpoena duces tecum calling for the Director of the East Alabama Mental Health and Retardation Center to produce certain documents. The respondents, other than respondent judge, and the minor filed a motion for a protective order. Thereupon, the trial judge directed the subpoena should not issue until the court ruled on the motion.
Guerdon Industries requested the clerk of the Circuit Court of Lee County to issue Subpoenas duces tecum to Gene Jones, the juvenile court officer, Debra Foster, an employee of the Pensions and Security Department, Captain Clifton Waller of the Opelika Police Department, and others involved in the juvenile court investigation of the minor, commanding these persons to appear at a deposition and to bring with them their records regarding the minor. The respondents, other than respondent judge, and the minor filed another motion for a protective order with respect to these depositions, and the trial judge ordered that the depositions not be taken until a ruling was made on the motions for protective orders.
A hearing was held to consider all the above mentioned motions. At that hearing, all the parties agreed in open court that the trial judge take the following actions: (1) make an In camera inspection and examination of the records of the Juvenile Court of Lee County with respect to the minor; (2) make an investigation of the proceedings conducted in the juvenile court concerning the minor; and (3) discuss such proceedings with Gene Jones, the juvenile officer, to determine the nature of the proceedings, the date the proceedings began, and the status of the minor in the proceedings. The trial judge thereupon took the actions which it was agreed that he take.
After those actions were completed the trial court entered an order prohibiting petitioners from discovering the contents of files and records of the juvenile court and any information developed as a result of the juvenile court proceedings. At the request of petitioner, Guerdon Industries, the protective order was later amended to make sure discovery was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Plitt v. Griggs
...against harmful side effects that would result from unnecessary disclosure. Ex parte Dorsey Trailers, supra; Ex parte Guerdon Industries, Inc., 373 So.2d 322 (Ala.1979). Rule 26 plainly indicates that discovery is not limited to matters competent as evidence at trial. "Relevancy," as used i......
-
Ex parte Morris
...or others, maximum protection against harmful side effects which would result from unnecessary disclosure. [ Marshall v. Guerdon Industries, Inc.], 373 So.2d 322 (Ala.1979). "... 'Relevancy,' as used in our discovery rules, means relevant to the subject matter of the action and a reasonable......
-
Ex parte State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
...discretion in ruling on such matters.' Drewes v. Bank of Wadley, 350 So.2d 402, 404 (Ala.1977). Also see, Ex Parte Guerdon Industries, Inc., 373 So.2d 322 (Ala.1979); Campbell v. Regal Typewriter Co., 341 So.2d 120 (Ala.1976). Since we find no abuse of discretion, the petition for writ of m......
-
Ex parte Dorsey Trailers, Inc.
...party, or others, maximum protection against harmful side effects which would result from unnecessary disclosure. Ex parte Guerdon Industries, Inc., 373 So.2d 322 (Ala.1979). The scope of discovery which may be had by interrogatories propounded pursuant to Rule 33, ARCP, is determined, as i......