Legal Opinion
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Microtune, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Texas
Decided June 4, 2009No. 3-08-CV-1105-BPublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
JEFF KAPLAN, United States Magistrate Judge.
In this securities fraud action, Defendants Douglas J. Bartek and Nancy A. Richardson have filed a joint motion to compel compliance with a Rule 45 subpoena served on Andrews Kurth LLP (“Andrews Kurth”), a law firm retained by their former employer, Mierotune, Inc. (“Microtune”), to investigate the company’s historic stock option practices. Microtune has filed a motion to quash the Andrews Kurth subpoena, as well as subpoenas served on other law firms and consultants who participated in the investigation. For the reasons…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Trammel v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United States v. ZolinSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Federal Trade Commission v. Grolier Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- In Re Royce Homes, LPUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas · 2011
- Doe v. Baylor UniversityDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · 2017
- Adhikari v. KBR, Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2020
- In re McDowellUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas · 2012
- League of United Latin American Citizens v. AbbottDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · 2022
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.