Legal Opinion

Borenstein v. Blumenfeld

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 20, 1979No. 57710PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Smith, Judge.

We granted this interlocutory appeal to determine whether the superior court erred in affirming the probate court’s denial of appellant’s motion for protective order. The motion for protective order was made in response to appellee’s motion to produce appellant’s federal income tax returns. Under the circumstances of this case, we have no hesitation in concluding that a protective order, preventing discovery of appellant’s income tax returns, should have been issued. Accordingly, the judgment is reversed.

1. "The relative wealth or financial condition of beneficiaries may…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Smith v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1976
  2. Estes v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1977
  3. Bailey v. BruceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
  4. Boswell v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. El Centro Del Barrio, Inc. v. Barlow, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1994
  2. Chamberlain v. Cherry, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1991
  3. HICKEY Et Al. v. RREF BB SBL ACQUISITIONS, LLCCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2016
  4. In Re Sullivan, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2006
  5. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia v. AmbatiCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2009

14 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