Legal Opinion

United States v. Quebe

District Court, S.D. Ohio

Decided May 16, 2017No. Case No. 3:15-cv-294PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DECISION AND ENTRY

Sharon L. Ovington, United States Magistrate Judge

I. INTRODUCTION

Believing that Defendants failed to adequately respond to its interrogatories, Plaintiff first moved to compel their responses in June 2016. (Doc. #s 22-23). The parties subsequently agreed to narrow the scope of discovery, and the Court denied Plaintiffs motion without prejudice to renewal. (Doc. # SO). Regrettably, this temporary truce between the parties quickly deteriorated, hope for cooperative discovery dissolved, and Plaintiff renewed its Motion to Compel. (Doc. #42).

In January 2017, the Court partially…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. HaegerSupreme Court of the United States · 2017
  3. Tung-Hsiung Wu (Sean Tung-Xiung Wu) v. T.W. Wang, Inc. D/B/A World Journal USACourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
  4. William Harmon v. Csx Transportation, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
  5. John Carpenter v. City of FlintCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2013

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Cywes v. CywesDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2024
  2. Cywes v. CywesDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2024
  3. Steven E. Greer v. Susan Harreld, et al.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2026

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

Powered by the Exa API