Legal Opinion
Penn Communications Specialties, Inc. v. Hess
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 30, 1975No. Civ. A. No. 74-2476PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
GORBEY, District Judge.
Defendants have moved for sanctions under Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure because of the refusal of one of the plaintiffs, Michael Piscanio, President of Penn Communications Specialties, Inc., to answer numerous questions in the course of his deposition.
The plaintiff, while being deposed in the course of pretrial discovery, by claiming his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination, refused to answer questions relevant to the action on fifty different occasions, which refusal defendants allege prejudiced and significantly impaired…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Malloy v. HoganSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Garrity v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Spevack v. KleinSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Jo Ann Lyons v. Wilbur R. Johnson, Jo Ann Lyons v. F. J. Delarios, Jo Ann Lyons v. F. J. DelariosCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969
- Stockham v. StockhamSupreme Court of Florida · 1964
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- The Black Panther Party v. William French Smith, Attorney General of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1981
- Air Et Chaleur, S.A., Pierre Berger, Daniel Cauchie, Jacques W. Van De Velde v. Eliot JanewayCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
- Serafino v. Hasbro, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1996
- Jones v. B. C. Christopher & Co.District Court, D. Kansas · 1979
- City of St. Petersburg v. HoughtonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1978
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.