Legal Opinion
In re DaimlerChrysler Ag Securities Litigation
District Court, E.D. Michigan
Decided July 2, 2003No. 03X70134PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
WGLALEN, United States Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion to compel compliance with subpoenas duces te-cum served on Respondents Bill Vlasic and Bradley A. Stertz, third parties to federal securities litigation pending in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, In re DaimlerChrysler AG Securities Litigation, Docket No. 00-0993-JJF (D.Delaware).1 2Respondents filed a brief in oppo*396sition, and the motion was referred for hearing and determination pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). Oral argument was held on March 4, 2003. For the…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Seminole Tribe of Florida v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Branzburg v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Henry Lavado, Jr. v. Patrick W. KeohaneCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1993
- Herbert v. LandoSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Thomas L. Feathers Kathleen Feathers v. William Aey J.P. Donohue, City of AkronCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hobley v. BurgeDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2004
- Compuware Corp. v. Moody's Investors Services, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2004
- Omokehinde v. Detroit Board of EducationDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2007
- Waid v. SnyderDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2022
- Whiting v. TrewDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 2021