These comments stuck out the most to me:
"We have made a document production request for those records in every case that we have with the Jehovah’s Witnesses, they refuse to produce that documentation."
"In cases that were already filed, the church has indicated it will not produce any documents"
They didn't say the WTS is unable to provide information; they said "will not" and "refuse".
Someone unfamiliar with the Org's past policies and actions might be left scratching their heads; "Why won't they cooperate? Don't they want to win the case? Refusing can't help but make them look bad."
...the WT Legal Dept is trying to stall as long as humanly possible, because a) losing and losing badly is a distinct possibility, and/or b) the documents in question may even be more incriminating then anyone had previously thought...
...i.e. they explicitly corroborate the plaintiffs' testimonies, and perhaps even expose the Org to even further wide-scale litigation of as-yet unreported cases in the near future.
Even if one were ordinarily skeptical, it's compelling to think that this might actually contribute to bringing the Org to its knees, and before anyone suggests that this is "wishful thinking", consider this...
...authoritarian regimes who's actions suggest a distinct fear of collapse usually have that fear for a reason.