Legal Opinion
Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway v. United States District Court for the District of Montana
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 30, 2005No. 04-72134PublishedCited by 49 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AND AMENDED OPINION
ORDER
The opinion filed March 31, 2005, slip op. 3893, and appearing at 403 F.3d 1042 (9th Cir.2005), is amended as follows:. At 403 F.3d 1047 (slip op. 3903, 3rd line from the bottom of the page), delete the text after “... the following factors:” to just before “(where providing particulars ... ”) and replace with the following:... the degree to which the objection or assertion of privilege enables the litigant seeking discovery and the court to evaluate whether each of the withheld documents is privileged ...
At 403 F.3d 1047 (slip op. 3904, at the end of the first…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Cheney v. United States District Court for District of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Holly W. BAUMAN Et Al., Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, Respondent, Union Oil Company, Real Party in InterestCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1977
- United States v. Kitsap Physicians ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- In Re Grand Jury Investigation. United States of America v. The Corporation 1Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Admiral Insurance Company v. United States District CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by49 opinions
- Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. U.S. Dist. Court for Dist. of Mont.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Gorrell v. SneathDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2013
- Universal City Development Partners, Ltd. v. Ride & Show Engineering, Inc.District Court, M.D. Florida · 2005
- Moe v. System Transport, Inc.District Court, D. Montana · 2010
- Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.