Legal Opinion

Hesselbine v. von Wedel

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma

Decided March 26, 1968No. Civ. No. 67-301PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

DAUGHERTY, District Judge.

Plaintiff has filed Interrogatories and Requests for Admission pursuant to Rules 33 and 36, F.R.Civ.P., 28 U.S.C., to certain of which Defendant has made objection on the grounds of privilege and relevancy.

Defendant asserts that the matters comprehended by Interrogatory No. 6 and Request for Admission Nos. 9A, 9B, 29A, and 29B are privileged matters not subject to discovery under Rule 33 and 36. The privilege claimed is that of the attorney-client relationship.1 Although there are statutes in both Oklahoma and Colorado concerning this privilege, the law…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. United States v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
  2. Brackett v. Woodall Food Products, Inc.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1951
  3. Kainz v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1954
  4. United States v. Columbia Steel Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1947
  5. Daisy D. Blankenship v. Maxwell RowntreeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1955

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Burlington Industries v. Exxon Corp.District Court, D. Maryland · 1974
  2. Biliske v. American Live Stock InsuranceDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 1977
  3. United States v. BonnellDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1979
  4. Foseco International Ltd. v. Fireline, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1982
  5. Northern Natural Gas Co. v. Approximately 9117.53 Acres in Pratt, Kingman, & Reno CountiesDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API