The moving parties (defendants) sought an order requiring the plaintiff to re-attend an examination for discovery to answer questions regarding damages, mitigation, and governmental land regulation issues.
The plaintiff opposed the motion, arguing it was a delaying tactic.
The court partially granted the motion, ordering the plaintiff to re-attend for two hours to be examined on the issue of damages, finding it proportionate given the $300,000 claim.
However, the court declined to order further examination on the governmental land regulation documentation, as it was not satisfied the plaintiff could provide relevant evidence on that matter.
