Legal Opinion
Gluck v. Ansett Australia Ltd.
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided December 14, 2001No. 00-00449 RWR DARPublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
ROBERTS, District Judge.
Plaintiff, Ronald G. Gluck, alleges he was injured during a flight on an airplane owned by defendant Ansett Airlines of Australia (“Ansett Airlines”). The plaintiff, appearing pm se, has moved this court to reconsider four rulings by the magistrate judge denying plaintiffs motions to compel and granting the defendant’s motion for a protective order. Because it was not clearly erroneous or contrary to law for the magistrate judge to issue a protective order or deny the motions to compel production of documents, responses *218to interrogatories,…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- John W. Wilson v. Volkswagen of America, Inc., a New York Corporation and Volkswagenwerk, A. G., a Foreign Corporation, Wolfsburg, Western GermanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1977
- Chudasama v. Mazda Motor Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1997
- Naartex Consulting Corporation, Russell Huff v. James G. Watt, Secretary of InteriorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1983
- Compagnie Des Bauxites De Guinea v. Insurance Company of North AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1981
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Gregory Cummings Trace Cummings, Husband and Wife v. General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
- Banks v. Office of Senate Sergeant-At-ArmsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2004
- Globalaw Ltd. v. Carmon & Carmon Law OfficeDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2006
- Klayman v. Judicial Watch, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2009
- Joseph L. v. Connecticut Department of Children & FamiliesDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2005
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.