Legal Opinion
Thomas v. Marina Associates
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided May 8, 2001No. 00-CV-709PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
TUCKER, District Judge.
Defendant Marina Associates has filed a Motion to Quash Subpoenas Issued to the Records Custodian of Dr. Todd Lipschultz and the Designated Officer and Records Custodian of the Orthopedic Wellness Center. Dr. Lipschultz is a medical expert retained by defendant in this action. Defendant points out that subpoenas issued under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 may not be used to circumvent the limitations on expert discovery set forth in Fed.R.Civ.P. 26, citing Marsh v. Jackson, 141 F.R.D. 431, 432 (W.D.Va.1992). As the Marsh court noted, even though…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United States v. Alex J. RaineriCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1982
- Johnson v. GmeinderDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2000
- Windsor v. MartindaleDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1997
- Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd. v. Merck KGaADistrict Court, S.D. California · 1999
- United States v. TomisonDistrict Court, E.D. California · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- First Sealord Surety v. Durkin & Devries Insurance AgencyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2013
- Uppal v. Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine & ScienceDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2015
- Itochu International, Inc. v. Devon Robotics, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
- Greene v. Philadelphia Housing AuthorityDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2011
- U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. JamesDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2010
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.