Motion to Stay Discovery in North Dakota

Background

“Every court has the authority to stay its proceedings to insure that justice is accomplished.” (See Matter of Bo (1985) 365 N.W.2d 847, 853.)

“Rule 26(c)(1) of the North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes the trial court to stay discovery pending a dispositive motion.” (See Kouba v. State (2004) 687 N.W.2d 466, 472.)

“Rule 26(c)(1), N.D.R.Civ.P., provides in pertinent part: upon motion by a party . . . and for good cause shown, the court in which the action is pending . . . may make any order which justice requires to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense, including . . . that discovery not be had.” (See id.)

General Information for Complaints and Motions

“This Court has noted that when considering Rule 26(c), great deference should be given to any case law interpreting and construing Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c).” (See id.)

“Federal courts have held that a protective order to stay discovery pending determination of a motion is an appropriate exercise of the court's discretion when the motion will be dispositive of all the claims.” (See id.)

Standard of Review and Burdens of Proof

“This court has inherent and constitutional power to act in preservation of its jurisdiction or under Rule 62(l), N.D.R. Civ.P., to grant a stay pending appeal.” (See Bergstrom v. Bergstrom (1978) 271 N.W.2d 546, 549.)

“In Cass County Electric, supra, this court adopted guidelines for a district court to utilize when addressing an application for a stay.” (See id.)

"The four criteria within these guidelines are: (a) a strong showing that the appellant is likely to succeed on appeal; (b) that unless the stay is granted, the appellant will suffer irreparable injury; (c) that no substantial harm will come to any party by reason of the issuance of the stay; and (d) that granting the stay will do no harm to the public interest.” (See id.)

“The court further stated that if the district court determined that a stay should be granted, it should set forth its finding with specificity so that, if appellate consideration is requested, this court may better understand the basis of the trial court's decision.” (See id.)

“Finally, the court observed that an opinion of the district court on such an issue ordinarily will not be set aside unless the district court is found to have abused its discretion.” (See id.)

The Court’s Decisions

It is well settled that “if the court finds that in the interest of substantial justice the action should be heard in another forum, the court may stay or dismiss the action in whole or in part on any condition that may be just.” (See Lumber Mart, Inc. v. Haas International Sales & Service, Inc. (1978) 269 N.W.2d 83, 88.)

It is also well settled “the trial court is vested with a wide discretion in determining whether a stay shall be granted upon an appeal.” (See Schmidt v. Frank (1966) 144 N.W.2d 572, 573.)