Legal Opinion

Topol v. Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided February 27, 1995No. Civ. A. No. 94-1711PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*477 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

ANITA B. BRODY, District Judge.

Before me is defendants’ motion to compel discovery of plaintiff’s diary and plaintiff’s motion for a protective order against discovery. I must decide whether the diary is relevant and nonprivileged, and if so, whether disclosure will cause undue annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression. Since I conclude that the diary is relevant and nonprivileged and that disclosure will not cause undue annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression, I will grant defendants’ motion to compel discovery and deny plaintiff’s motion for a protective order.

Plaintiff…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Great West Life Assurance Co. v. LevithanDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1994
  2. Premack v. J.C.J. Ogar, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1993
  3. In Re Grand Jury Subpoena (Psychological Treatment Records)District Court, D. New Jersey · 1989

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Merrill v. Waffle House, Inc.District Court, N.D. Texas · 2005
  2. Vanderbilt v. Town of ChilmarkDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1997
  3. Sarko v. Penn-Del Directory Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1997
  4. Jackson v. Chubb Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2000
  5. Vann v. Lone Star Steakhouse & Saloon of Springfield, Inc.District Court, C.D. Illinois · 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