Gallagher v. Magner Ex Rel. City of St. Paul's Department of Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement, 619 F.3d 823 (2010)

Citation: Gallagher v. Magner Ex Rel. City of St. Paul's Department of Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement, 619 F.3d 823 (2010)
Parent Document: Gallagher v. Magner Ex Rel. City of St. Paul's Department of Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement, 619 F.3d 823 (2010)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2010-09-01
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/174536/gallagher-v-magner-ex-rel-city-o... ↗

Full Text

805 chars

With regard to the TISH reports, the City provided Appellants with a list of
forty-five TISH evaluators who prepared disclosure reports on properties in the City
from 2001 to 2003. From that information, Appellants could subpoena the TISH
reports (at the City’s expense). Appellants chose not to subpoena the TISH evaluators
for their records. The magistrate judge concluded, “Such a failure to pursue discovery
is incongruent with Plaintiff’s claim of prejudice.” We agree. In evaluating prejudice,
we have looked to whether an allegedly harmed party took other available means to
obtain the requested information. See Sentis Group, Inc. v. Shell Oil Co., 559 F.3d
888, 903 (8th Cir. 2009). Under these circumstances, the district court did not abuse
its discretion by finding that prejudice was lacking.

Other Sections in This Document (106)

Full Text