Legal Opinion
King v. Pratt & Whitney
District Court, S.D. Florida
Decided April 27, 1995No. 93-8609-CIVPublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
GONZALEZ, District Judge.
THIS CAUSE has come before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Examination Outside the Scope of Rule 30(b)(6) Notices. The Motion has been fully briefed and is ripe for disposition.
Plaintiff served three Rule 30(b)(6) notices which requested Defendant to designate representatives to testily as to three issues. Defendant produced two representatives to testify as to those three issues. At deposition, these deponents were also asked questions that went beyond the scope of the three issues described in the Rule 30(b)(6) notices.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Paparelli v. Prudential InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1985
3Cited by47 opinions
- U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Caesars Entertainment, Inc.District Court, D. Nevada · 2006
- Starlight International Inc. v. HerlihyDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1999
- American Airlines, Inc. v. Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & HamptonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- Detoy v. City & County of San FranciscoDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2000
- Falchenberg v. New York State Department of EducationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2008
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.