Legal Opinion
Doubleday v. Ruh
District Court, E.D. California
Decided June 11, 1993No. CIV S-92-1298 LKK GGHPublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED ORDER
HOLLOWS, United States Magistrate Judge.
This case involves challenging questions concerning the applicability of work product immunity and state law privileges in protecting the prosecution files of deputy district attorneys employed by the County of Sacramento from discovery in a subsequent, related federal civil rights action. With understanding that there exist reasonable arguments on both sides of the issue, the court finds that work product immunity does not apply, and that the remaining state privileges are ineffective to preclude discovery in this federal action.
BACKGROUND
P…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Sterling Usher v. City of Los Angeles, Richard A. Gonzales, Michael E. Melton, Jose E. Ramirez, Joe Rios, and Robert L. VannCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- United States v. MorganSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Federal Bureau of Investigation v. AbramsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- A. Farber & Partners Inc. v. GarberDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2006
- Fitzgerald v. CassilDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2003
- Prindel v. Ravalli CountyMontana Supreme Court · 2006
- Crosby v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2010
- United States v. City of TorranceDistrict Court, C.D. California · 1995
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.