Legal Opinion
Lasky v. Continental Products Corp.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided July 20, 1983No. Civ. A. 82-3415PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
NEWCOMER, District Judge.
Before the Court is the motion of the defendant Continental Gummi-Werke, Aktiengesellschaft (“CGW”) for a protective order. This motion will be denied.
CGW seeks an order requiring that all discovery which the plaintiffs seek to take from CGW shall be done in accordance with the provisions of the Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil and Commercial Matters, done 18 March, 1970, 23 U.S.T. § 2555, T.I.A.S. No. 7444, 28 U.S.C. § 1781 (“Hague Convention”).
CGW is a corporation, organized under the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany, which…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Societe Internationale Pour Participations Industrielles Et Commerciales, S. A. v. RogersSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Pain v. United Technologies Corp.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
- Arthur Andersen & Co. v. Honorable Sherman G. Finesilver, Etc., State of Ohio v. Arthur Andersen & Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1977
- In re Westinghouse Electric Corp. Uranium Contracts LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1977
3Cited by17 opinions
- Compagnie Francaise d'Assurance Pour le Commerce Exterieur v. Phillips Petroleum Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1984
- Robert J. Boreri v. Fiat S.P.A.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1985
- Gebr. Eickhoff Maschinenfabrik Und Eisengieberei mbH v. StarcherWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1985
- Graco, Inc. v. Kremlin, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1984
- In Re Anschuetz & Co., GmbhCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.