Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jiang v. Porter

United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division

August 12, 2016

REV. XIU HUI "JOSEPH" JIANG, Plaintiff,
v.
TONYA LEVETTE PORTER, et al., Defendants.

          Rev. Xiu Hui "Joseph" Jiang, Plaintiff, represented by Dean John Sauer, JAMES OTIS LAW GROUP, LLC & Michael Charles Martinich-Sauter, JAMES OTIS LAW GROUP, LLC.

          Tonya Levette Porter, Defendant, represented by J. Brent Dulle, ST. LOUIS CITY COUNSELOR'S OFFICE & Rory Patrick O'Sullivan, ST. CHARLES COUNTY COUNSELOR OFFICE.

          Jaimie D. Pitterle, Defendant, represented by J. Brent Dulle, ST. LOUIS CITY COUNSELOR'S OFFICE & Rory Patrick O'Sullivan, ST. CHARLES COUNTY COUNSELOR OFFICE.

          N. M., Defendant, represented by Brian Jay Klopfenstein, Law Office of Brian J Klopfenstein.

          Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, Inc., Defendant, represented by Amy J. Lorenz-Moser, CARPENTER MOSER, LLC & Daniel J. Carpenter, CARPENTER MOSER, LLC.

          David Clohessy, Defendant, represented by Amy J. Lorenz-Moser, CARPENTER MOSER, LLC & Daniel J. Carpenter, CARPENTER MOSER, LLC.

          Barbara Dorris, Defendant, represented by Amy J. Lorenz-Moser, CARPENTER MOSER, LLC & Daniel J. Carpenter, CARPENTER MOSER, LLC.

          Jane Doe, Intervenor, represented by Michael P. Downey, DOWNEY LAW GROUP LLC & Raphael S. Nemes, DOWNEY LAW GROUP LLC.

          Paula Poe, Intervenor, represented by Michael P. Downey, DOWNEY LAW GROUP LLC & Raphael S. Nemes, DOWNEY LAW GROUP LLC.

          Richard Roe, represented by Michael P. Downey, DOWNEY LAW GROUP LLC & Raphael S. Nemes, DOWNEY LAW GROUP LLC.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          CAROL E. JACKSON, District Judge.

         This matter is before the Court on the motion of defendants Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (SNAP), David Clohessy, and Barbara Dorris (collectively, the "SNAP defendants") for an interlocutory appeal of an order compelling discovery and to stay their response to plaintiff's motion for sanctions pending resolution of the interlocutory appeal. The SNAP defendants seek to certify for appeal the question of whether the plaintiff, who was once accused of sexually abusing a minor, may obtain through discovery "confidential" information acquired by defendants from victims of sexual abuse. Plaintiff has responded in opposition.

         Section 1292(b) of Chapter 28 of the United States Code provides a mechanism through which a party can pursue an interlocutory appeal. To satisfy the requirements of § 1292(b), a case must involve an issue that concerns "(1) a controlling question of law as to which there is (2) a substantial ground for difference of opinion and upon which (3) a decision will materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation." Paschall v. Kansas City Star Co., 605 F.2d 403, 406 (8th Cir. 1979).

         "It has, of course, long been the policy of the courts to discourage piecemeal appeals because most often such appeals result in additional burdens on both the courts and the litigants." White v. Nix, 43 F.3d 374, 376 (8th Cir. 1994) (quoting Control Data Corp. v. Int'l Bus. Machs. Corp., 421 F.2d 323, 325 (8th Cir. 1970)). As such, the Eighth Circuit has instructed that permission to allow interlocutory appeals should be "granted sparingly and with discrimination." Id . Section 1292(b), therefore, should be used only in "exceptional cases where a decision on appeal may avoid protracted and expensive litigation." Id . The movant bears the "heavy burden" of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.