Opinion
CASE NO. 08-60190-CIV-ZLOCH.
August 14, 2008
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Defendant's Motion To Compel Production (DE 33). The Court has carefully reviewed said Motion and the entire court file and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.
In its discovery request #13, Defendant sought a copy of the retainer agreement between Plaintiff and his attorneys. Plaintiff objected to this request, and after conferral an amicable resolution could not be had. The instant Motion followed.
In its Motion, Defendant argues that the Plaintiff's retainer agreement with his attorneys is both discoverable and relevant to Plaintiff's claims. The Court agrees. It is well established that a retainer agreement is discoverable. Universal City Devolpment Partners, Ltd. v. Ride Show, Enginering Inc., 230 F.R.D. 668, 691 (M.D. Fla. 2005). Further, in this case, part of Plaintiff's prayer for relief is his attorney's fees. DE 17, p. 8. Thus, his attorney's fee agreement is relevant to his claim and among the many factors that Defendant must take into account when defending this action.
Accordingly, after due consideration, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. That Defendant's Motion To Compel Production (DE 33) be and the same is hereby GRANTED;
2. By noon, Tuesday, August 19, 2008, Plaintiff Paul Tokraz shall serve upon Defense Counsel the documents requested in Defendant's Request For Production #13;
3. Pursuant to Rule 37(a)(5) by noon, Tuesday, August 19, 2008 Plaintiff Paul Tokraz shall file a memorandum with the Clerk of this Court showing cause for his failure to produce the discovery requested in Defendant's Request For Production #13;
4. Pursuant to Rule 37(a)(5) by noon, Tuesday, August 19, 2008 Defendant shall file a memorandum complete with the information required by Local Rule 7.3(A), to establish the attorney's fees and costs incurred in preparation and execution of the instant Motion (DE 33).
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida.