Legal Opinion
Elliott Associates, L.P. v. Republic of Peru
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided October 8, 1997No. Nos. 96 CIV. 7917(RWS), 96 CIV. 7916(RWS)PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SWEET, District Judge.
Defendant The Republic of Peru (“Peru”) brings this motion to compel non-party Michael Straus (“Straus”) to appear for deposition, pursuant to Rule 37(a) and 26(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to answer questions relating to: (1) the dates and subject matter of his representation of Elliott; and (2) the addresses and telephone numbers of Raphael Gerstel and Christian Veilleux, both of whom Straus represented as their attorney in previous sovereign debt-related litigation. Straus opposes this motion on the grounds that the questions posed impinge on…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- United States v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Edward E. Colton and Lillian Kaltman v. United States of America, United States of America v. Edward E. ColtonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962
- Spectrum Systems International v. Chemical BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- Priest v. HennessyNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Condit v. DunneDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2004
- Alexander v. Federal Bureau of InvestigationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1998
- NXIVM Corp. v. O'HaraDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2007
- Ehrich v. Binghamton City School DistrictDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2002
- Elliott Associates, L.P. v. Republic of PeruDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.