In a FDCPA case, the defendants moved to either compel discovery or exclude medical evidence presented by the plaintiff. Sanctioning the defendants, the Court observed as follows:
“Defendants cited caselaw that analyzed the version of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1) that existed before the highly publicized amendments took effect on December 1, 2015. As this court indicated at the April 5, 2016, hearing, the December 1, 2015, amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) ‘dramatically changed’ what information is discoverable. The court therefore found inexplicable Mr. Ryan’s citations to outdated caselaw and concluded that misrepresentation also warrants sanctions.” Holding further: “The court finds by clear and convincing evidence that at a minimum, Defendants recklessly misrepresented the law and the facts to the court in an effort to limit the evidence that Mr. Fulton could present at trial.”
Fulton v. Livingston Financial, No.15-0574, 2016 WL 3976558 (W.D.Wash. July 25, 2016).