Legal Opinion
Cooey v. Strickland
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided August 16, 2010No. Nos. 2:04-cv-1156, 2:09-cv-242, 2:10-cv-27PublishedCited by 49 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
GREGORY L. FROST, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court for consideration of Defendants’ Privilege Log (Doc. # 774-1), Defendants’ Supplemental Privilege Log (Doc. # 777-1), and Plaintiffs’ Memo in Opposition to Defendants’ Privilege Log and Claims (Doc. # 794). For the reasons that follow, the Court finds that the documents are privileged or protected by the work product doctrine.
I. BACKGROUND
This is a federal civil rights case concerning Ohio’s lethal injection policy and procedures. (Doe. # 794, at 7.) Plaintiffs Jonathan Monroe, Brett Hartman, and Jerome…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. Louis KovelCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- In Re Sealed CaseCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982
- United States v. Monroe Adlman, as Officer and Representative of Sequa CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by49 opinions
- Laukus v. Rio Brands, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2013
- Total Quality Logistics, L.L.C. v. BBI Logistics, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2022
- Cincinnati Enquirer v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Commrs.Ohio Court of Claims · 2020
- In re HaynesUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Tennessee · 2017
- Jacobs v. Equity Trust Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2020
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.