Legal Opinion
Pippenger v. Gruppe
District Court, S.D. Indiana
Decided July 6, 1994No. IP 90-195 CPublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BARKER, Chief Judge.
Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 72(a), defendant, William H. Gruppe (“Gruppe”), has filed an objection to an order entered by Magistrate Judge Kennard P. Foster on December 10, 1993 (the “order”). In the order Magistrate Judge Foster denied Gruppe’s Combined Motion to Compel Answers to Questions Asked on Oral Examination and to Compel Production of Documents and for Sanctions (“Motion to Compel”). Magistrate Judge Foster also denied Gruppe’s motion to compel Pippenger’s former counsel, Harold C. Wheeler (“Wheeler”) to answer certain questions propounded to him during a…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. NoblesSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Coastal States Gas Corporation v. Department of EnergyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Navigant Consulting, Inc. v. WilkinsonDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2004
- State Ex Rel. United Hospital Center, Inc. v. BedellWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1997
- Public Service Co. of New Mexico v. LyonsNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2000
- Seacoast Builders Corp. v. RutgersNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2003
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. Microtune, Inc.District Court, N.D. Texas · 2009
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.