Legal Opinion
In re Ampicillin Antitrust Litigation
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided March 20, 1978No. M.D.L. No. 50; Misc. 45-70PublishedCited by 60 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
CHARLES R. RICHEY, District Judge.
Plaintiffs in these consolidated cases seek discovery of documents which have been identified by the defendants, Beecham Group Limited and Beecham, Inc. (Beecham), in their responses to interrogatories submitted by the plaintiffs. Beech-am, however, refused to produce many of these documents, asserting the protection of the attorney-client privilege.1 Plaintiffs then filed motions to compel production under Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a). Because these motions involved complicated issues and over 700 documents, the Court appointed a Special Master for…
2Cases cited46 opinions
- Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Mead Data Central, Inc. v. United States Department of the Air ForceCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1977
- United States v. United Shoe MacHinery CorporationDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1950
- Topliff v. TopliffSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Diversified Industries, Inc. v. The Honorable James H. Meredith, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of MissouriCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1978
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by60 opinions
- Consolidation Coal Co. v. Bucyrus-Erie Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1982
- American Standard Inc. v. Pfizer Inc. And Howmedica, Inc., and Biomet, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- State Ex Rel. Stovall v. MeneleySupreme Court of Kansas · 2001
- Chubb Integrated Systems Ltd. v. National BankDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1984
- Golden Trade v. Lee Apparel Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1992
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.