Legal Opinion
Jochims v. Isuzu Motors, Ltd.
District Court, S.D. Iowa
Decided September 16, 1993No. Civ. No. 3-89-70109PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON OBJECTIONS TO ORDERS
VIETOR, District Judge.
Defendant Isuzu Motors, Ltd. (“Isuzu”) objects to two orders entered by Magistrate Judge Mark W. Bennett on May 24, 1993. Jochims v. Isuzu Motors, Ltd., 148 F.R.D. 624 (S.D.Iowa 1993) (hereinafter “Jochims.”) One order granted a petition to permit intervention for the purpose of modifying the protective order previously entered in this case, and the second order entered an amended protective order. Because I conclude that the orders are, in part, clearly erroneous and contrary to law, the orders are modified as set forth herein.
I.…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Seattle Times Co. v. RhinehartSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
- Gandee v. GlaserDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1992
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Hoechst Diafoil Company v. Nan Ya Plastics CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1999
- Livingston v. Isuzu Motors, Ltd.District Court, D. Montana · 1995
- Duron v. Guidant Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2007
- In Re Exide TechnologiesUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · 2006
- United States v. Marsten Apartments, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1997
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.