Wauchop V. Domino's
The case of Wauchop v. Domino 's Pizza, Inc. involves a wrongful death suit on behalf of a family at the hands of an employee of a Domino 's Pizza franchise. In this instance the defendants named were the company itself, the president, the franchise owner, and the driver of the deliver vehicle involved. The plaintiffs claim that the 30-minute delivery policy was the cause of the accident resulting in the death of the woman.
The plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment against Thomas Monaghan as result of his refusal to offer himself for deposition. Monaghan sought summary judgment in lieu of his deposition. Judge Miller of the US District Court in Indiana issued the decision. The decision basically states that Monaghan 's claim of noninvolvement in the resulting accident is not valid and summary judgment will not be allowed. As the president of the parent company and a party to the company policy that is at issue in this case, his deposition would violate the plaintiff 's right to pretrial discovery.
Depositions can be costly and time consuming and are avoided by the deposed parties unless required by the court or necessary to the case. The loss to the business in terms of time and money may be large contributors to businesses attempting to avoid deposition, but there are also more nefarious causes. Parties may wish to preclude the opposing party from discovering damaging information. Parties may also wish to drag out the length of the process to the point that the other party can no longer afford to continue their suit. In this instance, it can only be assumed that Monaghan and Domino 's Pizza are in the opinion that the policy in question has no bearing on the case at hand. Their true motives if different from those professed are known only by the defendants.
The judge in this case felt that because the case centered on the 30-minute delivery policy, that the testimony of the people involved in the development and implementation was
The plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment against Thomas Monaghan as result of his refusal to offer himself for deposition. Monaghan sought summary judgment in lieu of his deposition. Judge Miller of the US District Court in Indiana issued the decision. The decision basically states that Monaghan 's claim of noninvolvement in the resulting accident is not valid and summary judgment will not be allowed. As the president of the parent company and a party to the company policy that is at issue in this case, his deposition would violate the plaintiff 's right to pretrial discovery.
Depositions can be costly and time consuming and are avoided by the deposed parties unless required by the court or necessary to the case. The loss to the business in terms of time and money may be large contributors to businesses attempting to avoid deposition, but there are also more nefarious causes. Parties may wish to preclude the opposing party from discovering damaging information. Parties may also wish to drag out the length of the process to the point that the other party can no longer afford to continue their suit. In this instance, it can only be assumed that Monaghan and Domino 's Pizza are in the opinion that the policy in question has no bearing on the case at hand. Their true motives if different from those professed are known only by the defendants.
The judge in this case felt that because the case centered on the 30-minute delivery policy, that the testimony of the people involved in the development and implementation was
References: