Legal Opinion
Rogers v. Proctor & Gamble Co.
District Court, E.D. Missouri
Decided September 5, 1985No. 83-0487C(C)PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
MEREDITH, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court upon petitioner’s motion to lift that part of a protective order which placed the deposition of Dr. Merlin S. Bergdoll under seal. Petitioner is the plaintiff in a separate action. For the reasons set forth below, petitioner’s motion will be denied.
The relevant facts are as follows. In Rogers v. Proctor & Gamble Company, this Court entered a protective order pursuant to Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The protective order was intended to protect certain confidential information which defendant Proctor &…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- United States v. HubbardCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
- Dr. Chester A. Wilk v. American Medical Association, the State of New York, InterveningCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981
- Iowa Beef Processors, Inc. v. Hughes A. BagleyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1979
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Ernst & ErnstCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Tucker v. Ohtsu Tire & Rubber Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 2000
- Jochims v. Isuzu Motors, Ltd.District Court, S.D. Iowa · 1993
- Jochims v. Isuzu Motors, Ltd.District Court, S.D. Iowa · 1992
- Puerto Rico Aqueduct & Sewer Authority v. Clow Corp.District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1986
- Group Health Plan, Inc. v. BJC Health Systems, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2000
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.