Insurance agent production quotas

1. Whether a court of appeals commits reversible error when it fails to give effect to a dispositive contract-interpretation argument that was properly raised and repeatedly briefed — namely, that the original Exclusive Agency Agreement contains no production quota and that Section XX.A expressly requires any modification to be made by a new written agreement stating that it modifies the Agreement — which Respondent never provided. 2. Whether a court may ignore or refuse to require authentication of case-law quotations that a party cannot locate in the cited authorities and that form the basis of a sanctions motion. 3. Whether false responses to Requests for Admission, later contradicted by the very individual whose statements were denied, and false representations concerning the employment status of proposed deponents, require correction or sanction when brought to the court's attention. 4. Whether a district court denies a party a fair opportunity to develop the record when it first authorizes specific depositions, then rescinds the subpoenas and denies a renewed request on procedural grounds shortly before the discovery deadline closes. 5. Whether a district court may permit the sealing or redaction of the operative contract whose interpretation is the central issue of the litigation during the period in which summary-judgment motions are decided?