Legal Opinion
Confidential Informant 92-95-932X v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided January 24, 2000No. 99-154 TPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
HEWITT, Judge.
Before the court is plaintiffs discovery motion. Plaintiff moves to strike defendant’s objection to certain discovery requests and to compel defendant to answer the propounded Interrogatories, Requests for Admissions, and Requests for Production and to produce a witness for deposition pursuant to Rule of the Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”) 30(b)(6). Defendant continues to interpose a nondisclosure objection under I.R.C. § 6103. For the following reasons, plaintiffs motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
1. Background2
On February 2, 1993, plaintiff, Confidential…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Mary Ann Tavery v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1994
- Lehrfeld, William J. v. IRSCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1998
- Baskin v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1998
- Jones v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1995
- Jones v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1996
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Vons Companies, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2001
- Whistleblower 14106-10W v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2011
- Jade Trading, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- Conway v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003
- Whistleblower 14106-10W v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2011