Ex Parte Cryer
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.]
The plaintiffs in a medical-malpractice case pending in the Mobile Circuit Court petition for a writ of mandamus. The petition presents the question whether the plaintiffs have clearly shown that they are entitled to an order of the trial court allowing them to discover certain evidence the defendants claim is privileged and need not be disclosed. After considering the record and the able arguments made by the parties in their respective briefs, we conclude that,…
Also in this document: Concurrence; Concurring in part, dissenting in part.
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Ex Parte Compass BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1996
- Wolff III v. Colonial BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1992
- Ex Parte AndersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 2000
- Ex Parte KrothapalliSupreme Court of Alabama · 2000
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Wells Dairy, Inc. v. American Industrial Refrigeration, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2004
- McGough v. G & A, INC.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 2007
- Roby v. Fairfield Nursing & Rehabilitation Center, L.L.C.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2009
- Parker v. Mobile Gas Service Corp.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2013
- Zoom Imaging, L.P. v. St. Luke's Hospital & Health NetworkDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2007
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.