The plaintiffs, foreign corporations engaged in online gambling, sought to recover stolen funds of approximately $34 million in connection with their website. Mr. Laplana had conducted a forensic audit to trace the misappropriated funds and was expected to be a witness at the trial. There were disputes regarding the appropriate representative for discovery, with the plaintiffs proposing Mr. Laplana and the defendants seeking the examination of Charlotte Payne and Keith Helman. The Beadle defendants requested the claims to be dismissed due to non-compliance with the court rules, but the plaintiffs argued that it was a disproportionate remedy. The court ruled that the Beadle defendants had the right to choose Charlotte Payne as their representative for discovery, despite her limited knowledge of the material facts. The court could not question the defendants' litigation strategy. Although Charlotte Payne had a medical condition, it did not prevent her from being discovered. Reasonable accommodations could be made. The relief sought by the defendants was granted, and the discovery was to occur by February 28, 2023. The plaintiffs' conduct did not warrant special costs. The defendants were awarded costs, and costs reflected the matter as if it were a one-day case. Costs thrown away were granted to the defendants. These were the reasons for judgment.