Legal Opinion

Gorrell v. Sneath

District Court, E.D. California

Decided April 5, 2013No. 1:12-cv-0554-JLTPublishedCited by 48 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY

JENNIFER L. THURSTON, United States Magistrate Judge.

I. Background

Plaintiff Wilson Gorrell (“Plaintiff’) filed a motion to compel discovery on February 11, 2013, seeking “to obtain complete answers to the discovery requests” pursuant to Rule 37(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. 33). On February 27, 2013, Defendants filed their opposition to the motion, asserting it was “both procedurally and substantively deficient.” (Doc. 38). Specifically, Defendants assert Plaintiff…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Soto v. City of ConcordDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1995
  3. Hallett v. MorganCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
  4. Chubb Integrated Systems Ltd. v. National BankDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1984
  5. Nestle Foods Corp. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1990

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by48 opinions

  1. (PC) Campbell v. DickeyDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2019
  2. (PC) Chester v. KingDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2019
  3. (PC) Givens v. PalagummiDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023
  4. (PC) Goods v. VirgaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023
  5. (PC) Hammler v. ClarkDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020

43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API