Knowles v. Gladden
District Court, D. Oregon
1Opinion of the Court
*644OPINION
KILKENNY, District Judge:
Petitioner, in this habeas corpus proceeding, moves to quash the respondent’s notice to take petitioner’s deposition.
Counsel for petitioner argue that discovery depositions are not permissible under 28 U.S.C. § 22461and Rule 81(a) (2), F.R.Civ.P.2 Supporting this view is Judge Murphy’s opinion in Sullivan v. United States, 198 F.Supp. 624 (S.D.N.Y.1961). Unless compelling reasons would otherwise indicate, having much more than a touch of the Celt in my own veins, I would lean toward the logic of a man named Murphy, be he judge or otherwise. Here, however, I…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. StewartSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Holiday v. JohnstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Federal Power Commission v. Tuscarora Indian NationSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Great Northern Railway Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Helvering v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Harris v. NelsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Harris v. NelsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1969