Legal Opinion

United States v. International Business Machines Corp.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided May 3, 1974No. 69 Civ. 200 (DNE)PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

EDELSTEIN, Chief Judge:

Pursuant to Pretrial Order No. 12 the parties in the above captioned action served subpoenas duces tecum and ad testificandum on ten1 competitors or former competitors of International Business Machines Corporation (IBM). Seven of the ten subpoenaed parties moved before this court for various forms of relief. In the main, three types of relief were requested: (1) advancement of costs for complying with the duces tecum directive of the IBM subpoena, Fed.R.Civ.P. 45(b)(2); (2) quashing or modifying certain portions of the IBM document demand, Fed.R. Civ.P.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In re Radio Corp. of AmericaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1952
  2. Blank v. Talley Industries, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1972
  3. United States v. International Business Machines Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1974

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Concord Boat Corp. v. Brunswick Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1996
  2. United States v. International Business Machines Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1979
  3. In re the Exxon ValdezDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1992
  4. Cantaline v. Raymark Industries, Inc.District Court, S.D. Florida · 1984
  5. Pollitt v. Mobay Chemical Corp.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1982

11 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