Legal Opinion
United States v. Bergonzi
District Court, N.D. California
Decided August 5, 2003No. CR-00-0505 MJJPublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR DISCOVERY
JENKINS, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
Before the Court are a motion to intervene filed by nonparty McKesson Corporation (“McKesson”) and motions to produce materials provided to the Government pursuant to agreements filed by both Defendants Albert Bergonzi (“Bergonzi”) and Jay Gilbertson (“Gilbertson”).1 McKesson’s motion to intervene requires the Court to determine whether the Company may intervene in the instant action to challenge Defendants’ request for the production of documents on grounds of privilege. Defendants’ motions for the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- United States v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
- Diversified Industries, Inc. v. The Honorable James H. Meredith, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of MissouriCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1978
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- Nidec Corp. v. Victor Co. of JapanDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2007
- Phillips v. C.R. Bard, Inc.District Court, D. Nevada · 2013
- California Sportfishing Protection Alliance v. Chico Scrap Metal, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2014
- McKesson HBOC, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- In re Syncor Erisa LitigationDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2005
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.