Legal Opinion

In re Processed Egg Products Antitrust Litigation

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided October 19, 2011No. MDL No. 2002; No. 08-md-2002PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*115 MEMORANDUM OPINION

TIMOTHY R. RICE, United States Magistrate Judge.

Direct purchaser plaintiffs (“Plaintiffs”) seek to compel defendant United Egg Producers, Inc. (“UEP”) to produce or remove from sequestration certain documents and information involving defendant Sparboe Farms (“Sparboe”).1 UEP maintains the attorney-client privilege, the common-interest privilege, and the work-product doctrine shield the communications at issue from disclosure. All privilege questions, including those raised in this motion, have been referred to me for resolution pursuant to Rule 72(a) of the Federal Rules…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. United States v. NoblesSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  5. In Re Teleglobe Communications Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. In re Processed Egg Products Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2012
  2. Cottillion v. United Refining Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2011
  3. HYDROJET SERVICES, INC. v. SENTRY INSURANCE A MUTUAL COMPANYDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2022
  4. HYDROJET SERVICES, INC. v. SENTRY INSURANCE A MUTUAL COMPANYDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2022
  5. Pace-O-Matic, Inc. v. Eckert, Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLCDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2023

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API