Cahela v. Bernard
District Court, N.D. Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
CARNES, District Judge.
This case is presently before the Court on plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike [9-1], defendants’ Motion for Oral Argument [14-1] and plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel [17-1]. The Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, for the reasons set out below, concludes that plaintiffs’ motions should be granted in part and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
This a medical malpractice case arising out of defendants’ treatment of plaintiff James R. Cahela during the summer of 1991 for a suspicious lump or lesion on Mr. Cahela’s lower lip. After a biopsy of the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Hanna v. PlumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Richard Davis v. Robert H. FendlerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Scott v. Arex, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1989
- Brannen v. PrinceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1992
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Jayne H. Lee, Inc. v. Flagstaff Industries Corp.District Court, D. Maryland · 1997
- Safeco Insurance Co. of America v. RawstromDistrict Court, C.D. California · 1998
- Caliper Technologies Corp. v. Molecular Devices Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 2003
- Ecolab Inc. v. International Chemical CorporationDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · 2020