Outside Rule 11 Context, Discovery Concerning Pre-Filing Investigation Inappropriate

The court denied defendant's motion to compel plaintiff to produce discovery regarding its pre-filing investigation and sanctioned defendant "50% of the reasonable expenses incurred in opposing the motion, including attorney’s fees." "The Court finds that the adequacy of the pre-filing investigation conducted by [plaintiff] is not at issue, there being no Rule 11 motion pending. . . . While [plaintiff] has shown no basis to apply the attorney-client privilege, the work product doctrine is a valid objection to a pre-suit investigation performed by agents of a party in anticipation of litigation. [Defendant] has not even attempted to show the substantial need and undue hardship necessary to overcome this protection."

TQP Development LLC vs v. 1-800-Flowers.com Inc., et. al., 2-11-cv-00248 (TXED July 22, 2013, Order) (Payne, M.J.).