Frank Joe Baughman, Appellants v. American Telephone and Telegraph Company, a Corporation, and At&t Nassau…

Summary

The court held that the plaintiffs did not violate the interrogatory requirements or discovery orders by later identifying Dr. Panitz, and that any violation would not justify precluding her testimony absent willful disobedience or gross indifference. It also held that a good-faith motion for a protective order prevented requests for admissions from being deemed admitted and that the admissions should have been withdrawn. The court affirmed summary judgment on the property-damage and four nuisance claims, but reversed summary judgment on all personal-injury claims because discovery concerning medical causation was prematurely terminated.