Legal Opinion

Overseas Private Investment Corp. v. Mandelbaum

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided March 15, 1999No. CIV. A.97-1138 CKK/JMFPublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

FACCIOLA, United States Magistrate Judge.

On December 17, 1998, defendants (“the Mandelbaums”) served an amended notice of deposition upon the plaintiff, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (“OPIC”), pursuant to F.R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6). It advised OPIC that it had a duty to designate a person to testify on its behalf and indicated that the deposition would “concern all relevant and material matters in connection with the matters stated on Appendix A.” Exhibit D to OPIC’s Reply in Support of Its Motion For Clarification and For Partial Modification of Order of the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. King v. Pratt & WhitneyDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 1995
  2. Paparelli v. Prudential InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1985
  3. Edison Corp. v. Town of SecaucusNew Jersey Tax Court · 1998

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Caesars Entertainment, Inc.District Court, D. Nevada · 2006
  2. Detoy v. City & County of San FranciscoDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2000
  3. Harris v. StateDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2007
  4. Cabot Corp. v. Yamulla Enterprises, Inc.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2000
  5. Crawford v. George & Lynch, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2013

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API