In Yang, it was alleged that a collision was caused by the negligence of the defendant County. The transportation maintenance manager of the County was produced for discovery. Another employee of the County who was responsible for patrolling the highway had authority to order treatment of the highway on the day in question. The manager on discovery undertook to ask the other employee a number of questions regarding his involvement and these were answered but they were later corrected in some respects. It was held that without an examination of the other employee, the plaintiffs would be deprived of any meaningful discovery, particularly with the ambiguities and contradictions arising from the answers given to the undertakings which was said to be evidence that the manager was unable to satisfactorily inform himself. It was held, based upon Leadbeater v. Ontario and Tusa v. Walsh, that an order could be made under the discretion of a court to extend discovery.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.