Legal Opinion

Stencel v. Fairchild Corp.

District Court, C.D. California

Decided November 28, 2001No. 99-10572(GAF)(AWJX)PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY DEFENDANT’S EXPERT

FEESS, District Judge.

I

INTRODUCTION

The motion before this Court involves efforts by both parties to obtain an expert witness from the same law firm. Some months ago. Plaintiff approached one member of the Knobbe, Manens, Olson & Sear (“KMOB”) firm, Craig Summers, to testify as a patent expert. Mr. Summers tentatively agreed to accept the retention, but ultimately withdrew when he discovered a conflict that would prevent him from testifying against Defendant. Later, Defendant retained a different KMOB partner. Thomas Smegal, from a…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Marcella Ann Cromley v. Board of Education of Lockport Township High School District 205, Donald E. Weber, Richard J. DittleCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
  4. English Feedlot, Inc. v. Norden Laboratories, Inc.District Court, D. Colorado · 1993
  5. Paul v. Rawlings Sporting Goods Co.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1988

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Formosa Plastics Corp., USA v. Kajima International, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2006
  2. Ryan's Express Transportation Services, Inc. v. Amador Stage Lines, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Hewlett-Packard Co. v. EMC Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 2004
  4. Crenshaw v. Mony Life InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2004
  5. LaCroix v. Bic Corp.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2004

12 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