Procter & Gamble Co. v. Bankers Trust Co.
District Court, S.D. Ohio
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER UPHOLDING THE ASSERTION OF SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE BY JACK AND ROBIN LAVIN
FEIKENS, District Judge.
I. Background
In this complex derivative instruments case, Plaintiff Procter & Gamble (“P & G”) has sought extensive discovery from Defendants Bankers Trust Company and BT Securities Corporation (“BT”). A large part of this discovery has focused on what has been termed the “Bankers Trust tapes,” recordings made by BT of conversations between its traders and customers. BT’s automated process records all conversations on specific phones primarily for purposes of settling trade disputes.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Trammel v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Wolfle v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Blau v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- United States v. S. Mohammad MarashiCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Hershel CLADY, Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- United States v. McCollumCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2003
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jack Lavin and Robin LavinCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1997
- Beller v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2003
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. LavinDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1996
- Phoenix v. EsperDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2020
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.