Legal Opinion
Brian S. Faile v. The Upjohn Company
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 18, 1993No. 91-16938PublishedCited by 66 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REINHARDT, Circuit Judge:
This case requires us to decide whether an incarcerated pro se litigant completes “service” of discovery responses at the time he submits the responses to prison authorities for forwarding to the party being served. We hold that he does, and reverse and remand.
I
Brian S. Faile alleges that his use of the prescription drug Xanax, manufactured by defendant The Upjohn Company (“Upjohn”), resulted in depression and violent outbursts. Ultimately, he was seriously wounded by police officers reacting to his violent behavior, and was imprisoned after convictions of assault…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Houston v. LackSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Browder v. Director, Dept. of Corrections of Ill.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Dunn v. WhiteCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1989
- Manuel Lewis v. Richmond City Police Department, Director of Public Safety, City ManagerCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1991
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by66 opinions
- Wilson v. City of San JoseCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
- Charles E. McDowell Jr. v. Arthur Calderon, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Donald Burns v. Willis E. Morton, Superintendent Peter Verniero, the Attorney General of the State of New JerseyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1998
- Douglas v. NoelleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Schroeder v. McDonaldCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
61 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.