In Re Professionals Direct Insurance
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BOYCE F. MARTIN, JR., Circuit Judge.
Professionals Direct Insurance Company petitions this Court for a writ of mandamus to vacate a discovery order issued by the district court. Professionals Direct contends that the order erroneously compels it to produce documents protected by the federal work-product doctrine and by Ohio’s attorney-client privilege. Because we find that Professionals Direct has not met the heavy burden required to justify a writ of mandamus, we DENY its petition.
I
Professionals Direct is the malpractice insurer for Wiles, Boyle, Burkholder & Bringardner Co., a…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Cheney v. United States District Court for District of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Schlagenhauf v. HolderSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Will v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by89 opinions
- United States v. Deloitte LLPCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2010
- Gruenbaum v. Werner Enterprises, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2010
- Miller UK Ltd. v. Caterpillar, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2014
- Gooch v. Life Investors Insurance Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009
- Towne Place Condo. Ass'n v. Phila. Indem. Ins. Co.District Court, E.D. Illinois · 2018
84 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.