26(b)(1) proportionalty factor ruling: parties' relative access to relevant information and the parties' relative resources outweighs small amount in issue

From OMAR TORO, ET AL. VERSUS COASTAL INDUSTRIES, LLC, ET AL., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76337 (MD La 2018):




The proportionality factors espoused by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1) are the following: "the importance of the issues at stake in the action, the amount in controversy, the parties' relative access to relevant information, the parties' resources, the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues, and whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit." Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). As to the first factor, the importance of the issues at stake, the discovery requested by Plaintiffs goes to the core of their claims. The gravamen of Plaintiffs' allegations is that, during the course of their respective employments with Defendants, they worked overtime hours and did not receive overtime pay. Certainly documents reflecting the hours worked and the amounts paid are important to the issues. The third and fourth factors, the parties' relative access to relevant information and the parties' resources, also both weigh in favor of Plaintiffs' position. As the employer, Defendants would have the highest level of access to information [*12] regarding payroll, as those types of records would generally be kept in the usual course of business. Plaintiffs, on the other hand, may or may not retain pay stubs, and the Court is not aware of any obligation for them to retain these records. The last factor, whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefits, also weighs in favor of Plaintiffs for the same reason as the first factor. That is to say, the discovery sought by Plaintiffs goes to the core of their claims against Defendants such that its likely benefits are high, and Defendants have made no substantive showing regarding the burden or expense, other than to assert it is burdensome.

The only factor that potentially favors Defendants is their claim that the amount at issue does not exceed $15,000. However, considering the Court's finding that the remainder of the factors favor Plaintiffs' position, and nowhere in Plaintiffs' Complaint is their claim limited to $15,000, this factor does not tip the scales in favor of Defendants. In fact, in Reply, Plaintiffs dispute Defendants' assertion that there is no disagreement as to the amount of overtime at issue. (R. Doc. 21 at 3-4).