- 7 -
from respondent the redacted portions of the deposition
transcripts.
The material sought by respondent is relevant to the issues
we consider. As stated in Rosenfeld v. Commissioner, 82 T.C.
105, 112 (1984):
Rule 70(b) limits discovery to information or responses
which are relevant to the subject matter of the pending
litigation and which are not otherwise protected from
discovery on the ground of privilege or other
limitation. The standard of relevancy in a discovery
action is liberal. Zaentz v. Commissioner, 73 T.C.
469, 471-472 (1979). The burden of establishing that
the documents or responses sought are not relevant or
otherwise not discoverable is on the party opposing
production. Rutter v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 937
(1983); Branerton II, supra at 193; P.T. & L.
Construction Co. v. Commissioner, supra at 408.
Petitioner has not shown that the material sought by respondent
is not relevant. Petitioner, however, has raised the question of
whether the protective order issued in the Cinpres case is a
limitation on production in this proceeding.
This is our first occasion to consider whether this Court
should order the production of material which was subject to
another court’s protective order in a case which has been closed.
Under the District Court’s protective order, a party or
“aggrieved entity” was permitted to intervene to declassify a
document. Clearly, petitioner would have been entitled to seek
to declassify the redacted portions of the deposition. To the
extent petitioner is the classifying party, it may have been
entitled to disclose without declassification. Respondent,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011