Legal Opinion

Capek v. Mendelson

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided September 22, 1992No. Civ. A. No. 91-7396PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

ROBRENO, District Judge.

Present before the court is the quintessential business dispute involving multiple parties, complex issues of fact and law, skilled advocates and a not insubstantial amount of money at stake. Not surprisingly, the case has spawned numerous discovery disputes leading to a veritable discovery gridlock. The question before the court is how best to resolve these disputes without undue burden on scarce judicial resources while affording the parties their rights to pretrial discovery.

After a review of the pleadings in this case, consideration of the discovery…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Schwarzkopf Technologies Corp. v. Ingersoll Cutting Tool Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1992

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In Re TMI Litigation Cases Consolidated IIDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1996
  2. Tarkett, Inc. v. Congoleum Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1992
  3. Various v. VariousDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2011
  4. Capek v. MendelsonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1993
  5. Martin v. Cooper Plumbing & Heating, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1992

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API