Legal Opinion
Grace v. Center for Auto Safety
District Court, E.D. Michigan
Decided June 20, 1994No. 93-CV-74435-DTPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING NON-PARTY GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
HACKETT, District Judge.
Non-party General Motors Corporation (GM) filed a motion for sanctions against defense counsel Mark Robinson and defendant Clarence Ditlow for violating the court’s protective order. Because the court finds that Robinson and Ditlow willfully violated the court’s protective order, GM’s motion for sanctions shall be granted.
BACKGROUND
To protect non-party GM from having the deposition of its attorney Maynard Timm disseminated to products liability attorneys with no connection to this…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Illinois v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Roadway Express, Inc. v. PiperSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- In Re TMI Litigation Cases Consolidated IIDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1996
- Grace v. Center for Auto SafetyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
- United States v. Marsten Apartments, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1997
- Matter of SearerDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 1996
- Grace v. Center For Auto SafetyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.