Bradley v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

ORDER

MEDLER, United States Magistrate Judge.

This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel. [32] On July 26, 2000, this court considered plaintiffs’ Motion, reserved ruling and allowed the parties time to brief the issue of plaintiffs’ “substantial need” for the contested surveillance tape.

In its previous Order, the court discussed the less-than-clear discoverability status of non-evidentiary surveillance tapes— that is, tapes which defendant has stated unequivocally it will not use before or during trial for any purpose as in the present case. Courts have expressed a…