Legal Opinion

Washam v. BNSF Railway Company

District Court, E.D. Arkansas

Decided September 1, 2020No. 3:19-cv-00231Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION BRADLEY WASHAM PLAINTIFF v. Case No. 3:19-cv-00231 KGB BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY DEFENDANT ORDER Before the Court is defendant BNSF Railway Company’s (“BNSF”) motion to compel vocational examination pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 35 (Dkt. No. 52). Plaintiff Bradley Washam responded in opposition to the motion (Dkt Nos. 65, 93). BNSF replied (Dkt. No. 98). For the following reasons, the Court denies BNSF’s motion to compel vocational examination (Dkt. No. 52). BNSF requests that Mr. Washam submit himself…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Schlagenhauf v. HolderSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  3. Stanislawski v. Upper River Services, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1991
  4. Stewart v. Burlington Northern RailroadDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API