Legal Opinion

Raytheon Co. v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 7, 1989No. H005297PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PREMO, J.

This is a proceeding in mandate. Petitioner Raytheon Company (Raytheon) seeks review of a discovery order of the superior court which granted the motion of plaintiffs and real parties in interest Renault & Handley Employees Investment Co., Raymond G. Handley, Milla C. Handley, Y. A. Tittle, Minette Tittle, Carolyn Handley Gillen, Jeffrey Handley, and Mary Robins (collectively Renault), to compel production of documents. Raytheon claims these documents are protected by the attorney-client and work product privileges, respectively. In the underlying action, Renault sued Raytheon…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Mitchell v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Roberts v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
  4. Sav-On Drugs, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  5. BP Alaska Exploration, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988

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

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Tom L. Scott, Inc. v. McIlhanyTexas Supreme Court · 1990
  2. O'GRADY v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
  3. Bank of America, N.A. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  4. Oxy Resources California LLC v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
  5. People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000

23 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