Legal Opinion
Donlin v. Aramark Corp.
District Court, D. Utah
Decided June 9, 1995No. 94-C-380 WPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
BOYCE, United States Magistrate Judge.
The above entitled matter came on for hearing on the defendant’s motion to compel plaintiff to answer three questions put to plaintiff in her deposition, which counsel did not permit plaintiff to answer. Plaintiff did not claim a privilege from answering and did not apply to the court for a protective order. Rule 30(c) F.R.C.P. expressly requires that the deponent’s examination should proceed where an objection is made to the question of the examiner. Rule 30(d)(1) F.R.C.P. provides:
A party may instruct a deponent not to answer only when necessary to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Specht v. JensenCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1988
- United States v. AmmarCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1983
- Specht v. JensenCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1987
- Jean Lang v. Texas & Pacific Railway Company and Missouri-Pacific Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- James Wactor, Darlene Wactor v. Spartan Transportation Corporation, Also Known as Spartan Transportation CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1994
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Frances Parker, Etc. v. John W. Poole, M.D.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2015
- CPI Security Systems, Inc. v. Vivint Smart Home, Inc.District Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2024