United States v. Gordon
District Court, D. Delaware
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JORDAN, District Judge.
Introduction
I have before me a motion (Docket Item [“D.I.”] 21; the “Motion”) to admit Hamilton P. “Phil” Fox, III, Esquire (“Mr. Fox”) to serve pro hac vice in this case as defense counsel for defendant Sherry L. Freebery. Typically, pro hac vice motions are granted as a matter of routine, but this case is not routine and, both before and since the Motion was filed, Mr. Fox’s participation as defense counsel has been the subject of controversy, first being questioned by the United States Attorney’s Office, then by a citizen’s group, and finally by…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Wheat v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- United States v. Sells Engineering, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Nixon v. CondonSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- United States v. Anthony Provenzano, Stephen Andretta, and Thomas AndrettaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
- In Re Corn Derivatives Antitrust Litigation (Mdl 414). Appeal of John E. Koerner & Co., Inc., Imperial Products Corporation, and Pan-O-Gold, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- United States v. Prevezon Holdings Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2016
- Madukwe v. Delaware State UniversityDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2008
- Ploof v. HinesDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2022
- United States v. Prevezon Holdings, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2016