Dow Chemical Canada Inc. v. HRD Corp.
District Court, D. Delaware
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FARNAN, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is the Motion Of Defendant Counterclaim Plaintiff HRD Corporation For Discovery Abuse Sanctions (D.I. 247). For the reasons discussed, the Court will deny HRD’s Motion and award Dow the costs of defending HRD’s Motion.
I. BACKGROUND
This litigation stems from a failed business relationship between Dow Chemical Canada Inc. and The Dow Chemical Company (collectively “Dow”) on one side and HRD Corporation (“HRD”) on the other side. In short, the parties contracted to, first, jointly develop certain polyethylene wax products and, second, at the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Lefteri Poulis and Athena Poulis, His Wife v. State Farm Fire and Casualty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984
- In Re Elonex Phase II Power Management LitigationDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2003