Henry W. Kerr v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California, John Van Geldern, Real Parties in Interest
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HAMLEY, Circuit Judge:
Petitioners seek from this court a writ of mandamus or prohibition under 28 U.S.C. § 1651, vacating an order of respondent district court which granted a motion of the real parties in interest requiring petitioners to produce various documents by way of discovery under Rules 34 and 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. We deny the petition.
The real parties in interest, who seek the documents, are seven California state prisoners who have joined as plaintiffs in a civil rights action against petitioners in the respondent district court. 1 Plaintiffs in that…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Monroe v. PapeSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- United States v. NixonSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Will v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Roche v. Evaporated Milk Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- United States v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by368 opinions
- Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Soto v. City of ConcordDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1995
- Holly W. BAUMAN Et Al., Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, Respondent, Union Oil Company, Real Party in InterestCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1977
- Sanchez v. City of Santa AnaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- People v. MarshallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
363 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.