Bowman v. Consolidated Rail Corp.
District Court, N.D. Indiana
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM and ORDER
MILLER, District Judge.
This cause is before the court on defendant Consolidated Rail Corporation’s (“Conrail”) motion to compel production of documents pursuant to Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The parties complied with District Rule 7(e) but reached no *526resolution of their differences concerning discovery. The matter is now ripe for ruling.
I
This personal injury action arises from an alleged job-related accident. There was, at the time of the accident, an employee-employer relationship between plaintiff Marion P. Bowman and Conrail. During the course of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Kozlowski v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1976
- In re Folding Carton Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1977
- AM International, Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1981
- In re Folding Carton Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1978
- Association of Retired Railroad Workers v. United States Railroad Retirement BoardDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1985
3Cited by12 opinions
- Soto v. City of ConcordDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1995
- Henderson v. Zurn Industries, Inc.District Court, S.D. Indiana · 1990
- Burton Mechanical Contractors, Inc. v. ForemanDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1992
- Estate of Young v. HolmesDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 1991
- Wauchop v. Domino's Pizza, Inc.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 1991
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.