Legal Opinion

Norris Manufacturing Co. v. R. E. Darling Co.

District Court, D. Maryland

Decided December 5, 1961No. Civ. No. 12860PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMSEN, Chief Judge.

Plaintiff has served notice that it will take depositions under Rule 30, F.R.Civ. P., 28 U.S.C.A., of three private investigators employed by defendant or its attorneys, and has caused to be issued subpoenas duces tecum addressed to the witnesses requiring them to bring to the deposition all reports and other writings associated with the investigations they conducted of plaintiff’s agents, servants and employees in connection with the litigation pending in this court.

Defendant has moved under Rule 45 (b) to quash the subpoenas duces tecum on the grounds: (1) that the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. North v. Lehigh Valley Transit Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1950
  2. Buining v. the TransporterDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1959
  3. Buining v. The S.S. TransporterDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1959
  4. Stone v. Marine Transport Lines, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 1959

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Oliver B. Cannon & Son, Inc. v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1981
  2. Richardson v. Sexual Assault/Spouse Abuse Research Center, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API