Legal Opinion

Hoechst Celanese Corp. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided October 10, 1991PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

GEBELEIN, Judge.

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS BY DEFENDANTS

Plaintiffs move this Court for an order compelling the defendant insurance companies to provide full and complete responses to plaintiffs’ interrogatories and requests for production of documents.

A. Discovery History

On February 28, 1990, Hoechst served interrogatories and document requests on defendants. Under the terms of the Case Management Order, the defendants’ objections and responses to Hoechst’s interrogatories and document requests were due on July 16, 1990, and…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Marker v. Union Fidelity Life InsuranceDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1989
  2. Marshall v. Electric Hose & Rubber Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1975
  3. Delaware Optometric Corporation v. SherwoodSupreme Court of Delaware · 1957
  4. Paparelli v. Prudential InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1985
  5. In Re a Member of the Bar of the Supreme CourtSupreme Court of Delaware · 1969

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Paramount Communications Inc. v. QVC Network Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1994
  2. Evans v. United Services Automobile Ass'nCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
  3. Silva v. Basin Western, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2002
  4. State ex rel. Erie Insurance Property & Casualty Co. v. MazzoneWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2005
  5. Glenfed Dev. Corp. v. Superior Court of L.A. Cty.California Court of Appeal · 1997

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API