Transportation company denied interlocutory appeal over order requiring disclosure of training materials.

The plaintiff sought damages for injuries allegedly suffered during a fall he claimed was a result of an explosion caused by the defendant’s employee during the pumping of vinegar from the defendant’s tanker truck. The plaintiff sought discovery related to training procedures for cargo unloading, pump operation, repair and maintenance of leaks, and other internal documentation that the company maintained were private, proprietary, and outside the scope of discovery. The defendant sought a writ of certiorari via petition but was denied when the court not only determined that there was not a sufficient showing of harm as a result of disclosure that could not be addressed after an appeal of any final judgment in the case, but that the discovery requests in question were in fact “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.”

^{Case Law Alerts, 4th Quarter, October 2022 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2022 Marshall Dennehey, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}