Legal Opinion
Underwood v. O-Reilly Auto Parts, Inc.
District Court, D. Nevada
Decided September 20, 2022No. 2:21-cv-01766Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 ANGELA UNDERWOOD, 7 Case No. 2:21-cv-01766-GMN-NJK Plaintiff(s), 8 Order v. 9 [Docket No. 144] O’REILLY AUTO ENTERPRISES, LLC, et 10 al., 11 Defendant(s). 12 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to compel and for sanctions. Docket No. 13 144. Defendant O’Reilly Auto filed a response in opposition. Docket No. 150. Plaintiff filed a 14 reply. Docket No. 154. The motion is properly resolved without a hearing. See Local Rule 78-1. 15 For the reasons discussed more fully below, the motion to compel and for sanctions is GRANTED.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Pierce v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Kor Media Group, LLC v. GreenDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2013
- Barry G. Lew, M.D. v. Kona HospitalCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Marlyn Sali v. Corona Regional Medical CenterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- Pacific Harbor Capital, Inc.,plaintiff-Appellee v. Carnival Air Lines, Inc.,defendant, and Jeffrey M. Herman Stuart S. Mermelstein, Movants-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.