Hillerich & Bradsby Co. v. MacKay
District Court, District of Columbia
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM ORDER
URBINA, District Judge.
I. Introduction
This matter comes before the court upon the plaintiffs motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum served upon its attorney, Harvey B. Jacobson, Jr., Esq., by the defendants. The discovery dispute centers on whether the defendants had an attorney-client relationship with Mr. Jacobson, who also represented the plaintiff. The defendants’ subpoena duces tecum requested documents relating to a patent application Mr. Jacobson prepared, which listed the defendants as co-inventors. 1
The plaintiff, Hillerich & Bradsby Co. (“H & B”), based its motion to…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- EF Hutton & Company v. BrownDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1969
- In Re the Regents of the University of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1976
- Teresa Simpson, Administratrix of the Estate of Raymond K. Simpson, Deceased v. Motorists Mutual Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1974
- Athridge v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1998
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Attorney Grievance Commission v. SiskindCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
- Merck Eprova AG v. ProThera, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2009
- MacKenzie-Childs LLC v. MacKenzie-ChildsDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2009
- Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Zur Foerderung Der Wissenschaften E v. v. Wolf Greenfield & Sacks, PCDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2010
- Albany Molecular Research, Inc. v. SchloemerDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011