Legal Opinion
In Re Screws Antitrust Litigation
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided December 4, 1981No. M.D.L. 443PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
CAFFREY, Chief Judge.
Plaintiff screw distributors have filed a motion in limine to have ruled as admissa ble for the purposes of a forthcoming civil trial testimony which was given by a currently unavailable witness during an earlier criminal trial arising out of the same set of circumstances. Defendant screw manufacturer NL Industries, Inc. (NL) opposes this motion on the grounds that this testimony is hearsay which does not fit within any recognized hearsay exception. Because this testimony meets all the requirements of Fed.R.Evid. 804(b)(5) — the residual exception to the hearsay…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1980
- Lloyd v. American Export Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
- In re Master Key Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1976
- In Re IBM Peripheral Edp Devices, Etc.District Court, N.D. California · 1978
3Cited by8 opinions
- Beeler v. DowneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- United States v. Richard Feldman and Richard MartensonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- Creamer v. General Teamsters Local Union 326District Court, D. Delaware · 1983
- Supermarket of Marlinton, Inc. v. Meadow Gold Dairies, Inc.District Court, W.D. Virginia · 1994
- Bankers Trust Co. v. RhoadesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1989
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.