Legal Opinion

Tracfone Wireless, Inc. v. LaMarsh

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided April 1, 2015No. 2:14mc373PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum Order

DAVID STEWART CERCONE, District Judge.

Petitioner, Traefone Wireless, Inc. (“Tracfone” or “Petitioner”) initiated this matter pursuant to Rule 45(g) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure moving for entry of an Order requiring Respondents, Holden Property Services, LLC (“Holden”), and Patrick LaMarsh, (“LaMarsh”) (collectively “Respondents”) to appear before this Court and show cause why they should not (1) be held in contempt for failure to comply with properly issued and served subpoenas1 for depo*175sition duces tecum and (2) be required to reimburse Traefone for its eosts…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Roadway Express, Inc. v. PiperSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. Gompers v. Bucks Stove & Range Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
  4. Shillitani v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  5. International Union, United Mine Workers v. BagwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1994

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. BOARD v. KRS CONTRACTORS LLCDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2021
  2. Fox v. Manhattan Mechanical Services, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2021
  3. Ojo v. Brew Vino LLCDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2024
  4. SB PB VICTORY LP v. TONNELLE NORTH BERGEN LLCDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2025
  5. Smith v. All persons claiming a present or future InterestDistrict Court, Virgin Islands · 2025

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API