Gargano v. Metro-North
District Court, D. Connecticut
1Opinion of the Court
RULING
FITZSIMMONS, United States Magistrate Judge.
The court conducted a telephone conference call on February 3, 2004, to discuss scheduling and to resolve a discovery dispute. At the request of the court, the parties submitted letter briefs to supplement their initial argument. After hearing from counsel and reviewing the documents submitted, the court DENIES plaintiffs discovery request.
Plaintiff requests that the defendant/third-party plaintiff, Metro-North, produce transcripts of audio taped statements of Metro-North employees Robert Prentice, Richard DeChello, and Michael DiMinno. The…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Thomas Organ Co. v. Jadranska Slobodna PlovidbaDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1972
- In Re Grand Jury Proceedings John Doe Co. v. United States of America, Movant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2003
- Richard Hauger v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1954
- Almaguer v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific RailroadDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1972
- Eoppolo v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1985
3Cited by8 opinions
- In Re Grand Jury Subpoena Dated July 6, 2005Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
- Wilson v. Norfolk & Portsmouth Belt Line RailroadPortsmouth County Circuit Court · 2005
- Cohen v. Gulfstream Training Academy, Inc.District Court, S.D. Florida · 2008
- Cardenas v. JerathSupreme Court of Colorado · 2008
- Federal Election Commission v. RiveraDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2020
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.