Inter-Fluve v. Montana Eighteenth Judicial District Court
Montana Supreme Court
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
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. WeintraubSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Palmer v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeMontana Supreme Court · 1993
- Plumb v. Fourth Judicial District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1996
- Park v. Montana Sixth Judicial District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1998
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Miller v. Eighteenth Judicial District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 2007
- American Zurich Insurance v. Montana Thirteenth Judicial District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 2012
- Nelson v. City of Billings and MMIAMontana Supreme Court · 2018
- Montgomery v. eTreppid Technologies, LLcDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2008
- Meek v. Montana Eighth Judicial District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 2015
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.