Legal Opinion
Broessel v. Triad Guaranty Insurance
District Court, W.D. Kentucky
Decided August 2, 2006No. 1:04 CV 00004 JHMPublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
GOEBEL, United States Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court are Plaintiffs Motion to Compel (DN 103), Plaintiffs supplement (DN 116), Defendant’s response (DN 120), Plaintiffs reply (DN 129), and Defendant’s sur-reply (DN 142). At issue are documents that Defendant has withheld from production on claim of work-product protection, the attorney-client privilege, and/or the joint defense/common interest privilege. Pursuant to an earlier order (DN 132), Defendant submitted directly to the undersigned for in camera inspection all documents that it has withheld from production on claim of…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Duplan Corporation v. Deering Milliken, Inc.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1974
- United States v. Martin SchwimmerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
- Reed v. BaxterCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Invesco Institutional (N.A.), Inc. v. PaasDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2007
- Ford Motor Co. v. Edgewood Properties, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2009
- Adkisson v. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. (TV1)District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 2021
- Ciccio v. SmileDirectClub, LLCDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2022
- Elvis Presley Enterprises, Inc. v. City of MemphisDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 2020
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.