Cited by

¶ 14 (App. 2013); Gemstar Ltd. v. Ernst & Young

¶ 6 (App. 2000) (evidentiary rulings) (citing Gemstar Ltd. v. Ernst & Young, ); ¶ 14 (App. 2013) (discovery rulings); Sandretto v. Payson Healthcare Mgmt., Inc., ¶ 38 (App. 2014) (motion to continue) (citing Alberta Sec.

Holdings, L.L.C., ¶ 113 (App. 2012), and “[t]he question is not whether the judges of this court would have made an original like ruling, but whether a judicial mind, in view of the law and circumstances, could have made the ruling without exceeding the bounds of reason,” ¶ 14 (App. 2013) (alteration in original) (quotation omitted).

“A trial court has broad discretion in ruling on disclosure and discovery matters, and this court will not disturb that ruling absent an abuse of discretion.” ¶ 14, ( ¶ 3, ).

¶ 14 (App. 2013) ( ¶ 3 (App. 1998)).

¶ 14, (appellate court reviews superior court’s rulings on disclosure and discovery for abuse of discretion).

(“We do not substitute our discretion for that of the trial court.”).

–43, ¶ 21, –06 (App. 2013).

Under this standard, the question is “whether a judicial mind, in view of the law and circumstances, could have made the ruling without exceeding the bounds of reason.” ¶ 14 (App. 2013) (citation omitted).

(“A trial court has broad discretion in ruling on disclosure and discovery matters, and this court will not disturb that ruling absent an abuse of discretion.”); ¶ 6, (“We review the trial court’s evidentiary rulings fo

I. Standard of Review ¶13 “A trial court has broad discretion in ruling on disclosure and discovery matters, and this court will not disturb that ruling absent an abuse of discretion.” ¶ 14

Courts have “broad discretion in ruling on disclosure and discovery matters, and this court will not disturb that ruling absent an abuse of discretion.” ¶ 14