Legal Opinion
McPeek v. Ashcroft
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided August 20, 2001No. CIV.A.00-201(RCL/JMF)PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
FACCIOLA, United States Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before me on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel. On April 16, 2001, I granted Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Take Five Additional Depositions but stayed the taking of those depositions pending resolution of the motion to compel. I further directed the parties to meet and confer regarding the motion to compel in light of my previous decisions regarding the attorney-client privilege. On April 24, 2001, I received the parties’ jointly filed Praecipe which identified those discovery matters that are no longer at issue. I also…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Safecard Services, Inc. v. Securities and Exchange CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1991
- Coastal States Gas Corporation v. Department of EnergyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
- Department of the Interior v. Klamath Water Users Protective Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Roy E. Bowden v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1997
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Waters v. United States Capitol Police BoardDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2003
- Pinson v. U.S. Department of JusticeDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
- Fonville v. District of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2005
- Nesse v. PittmanDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2001
- Convertino v. United States Department of JusticeDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.