Legal Opinion
Dairyland Power Cooperative v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided November 20, 2007No. 04-106 CPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
DAMICH, Chief Judge.
Before the Court is Plaintiff Dairyland Power Cooperative’s Motion For Relief for Government Discovery Violations Regarding Rule 30(b)(6) Testimony, which stems from one case that is part of the ongoing spent nuclear fuel litigation before the Court of Federal Claims. The basis of Dairyland’s motion is twofold.
First, Dairyland alleges that Defendant United States’s witnesses, Christopher Kouts and David Zabransky, provided insufficient deposition testimony about specific topics as to which the government had designated them to testify pursuant to Rule…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
- United States v. NoblesSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Coastal States Gas Corporation v. Department of EnergyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ag-Innovations, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
- Securiforce International America, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
- Anaheim Gardens v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
- Zip-O-Log Mills, Inc., D/B/a, Zip-O Timber Co. v. the United States 0United States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
- Duke Energy Progress, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.