Legal Opinion

Inter-Fluve v. Montana Eighteenth Judicial District Court

Montana Supreme Court

Decided April 26, 2005No. 04-699PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

¶ 1 Inter-Fluve, Inc. (Inter-Fluve), seeks a writ of supervisory control, arguing that the District Court of the Eighteenth Judicial District, Gallatin County, is proceeding based on a mistake of law in controlling discovery proceedings with respect to the attorney-client privilege. ‘Discovery of potentially-privileged material presents unique issues which we have, under certain circumstances, found sufficient to invoke original jurisdiction.” Winslow v. Mont. Rail Link, Inc., 2001 MT 269, ¶ 2, 307 Mont. 269, ¶ 2, 38 P.3d 148, ¶ 2. Here, however, we decline to exercise…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  2. Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. WeintraubSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Palmer v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeMontana Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Plumb v. Fourth Judicial District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Park v. Montana Sixth Judicial District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1998

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Miller v. Eighteenth Judicial District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 2007
  2. American Zurich Insurance v. Montana Thirteenth Judicial District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Nelson v. City of Billings and MMIAMontana Supreme Court · 2018
  4. Montgomery v. eTreppid Technologies, LLcDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2008
  5. Meek v. Montana Eighth Judicial District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 2015

17 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