Legal Opinion

Hallamore Corp. v. Capco Steel Corp.

District Court, D. Delaware

Decided June 30, 2009No. Misc. Action No. 08-211-SLR; Civ. No. 08-cv-00075SPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM ORDER

SUE L. ROBINSON, District Judge.

At Wilmington this 30th day of June, 2009, having considered Hallamore Corporation’s (“plaintiff’) pending motion to compel non-party AmQuip Crane Rental, LLC to respond to a subpoena by attending a deposition and by producing documents pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45;

IT IS ORDERED that said motion (D.1.1) is denied and said subpoena is deemed invalid, for the reasons that follow:

1. Introduction. Hallamore Corporation (“Hallamore”) has filed a motion to compel a non-party, AmQuip Crane Rental, LLC (“AmQuip”), to respond to a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Echostar Communications Corp. v. News Corp.District Court, D. Colorado · 1998
  2. Kupritz v. Savannah College of Art & DesignDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1994

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Beresford v. Doe(s)Superior Court of Delaware · 2019
  2. COOK v. U.S. XPRESS, INC.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2025
  3. In re Application of Vestolit GmbH and Celanese Europe B.V.District Court, D. Delaware · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API