Legal Opinion
Sacramona v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided December 3, 1993No. Civ. A. No. 91-11255-GNPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S, THE BUDD COMPANY, MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF TO SUBMIT TO A BLOOD TEST (DOCKET ENTRY # 90)
BOWLER, United States Magistrate Judge.
On July 23, 1993, defendant The Budd Company (“Budd”) filed a motion to compel plaintiff Robert J. Sacramona (“plaintiff’) to submit to a blood test. (Docket Entry # 90). Defendant Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. (“Bridgestone”) filed a memorandum in support of Budd’s motion to compel (Docket Entry # 90). (Docket Entry # 98).1
On September 24, 1993, this court held a hearing and took the motion to compel (Docket Entry #90) under advisement.
BACKGROUN…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Schlagenhauf v. HolderSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Thomasina Mack v. The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
- Anne Anderson v. Cryovac, Inc., Globe Newspaper Company, IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1986
- Hector Santiago v. Paul J. Fenton, Etc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
- Marker v. Union Fidelity Life InsuranceDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1989
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Cabana v. ForcierDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2001
- State ex rel. C.S. v. DowdMissouri Court of Appeals · 1996
- Eckman v. University of Rhode IslandDistrict Court, D. Rhode Island · 1995
- McGrath v. Nassau Health Care Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 2002
- Harris v. Athol-Royalston Regional School District CommitteeDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2002
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.