Rickman v. Deere & Co.
District Court, E.D. Virginia
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
SPENCER, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the motion of defendant Deere & Company (“Deere”), pursuant to Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to compel the production of certain documents. For the reasons set forth below, as well as those stated from the bench, defendant’s motion will be GRANTED.
I
In this action, plaintiff Earl W. Rickman, Jr., seeks compensation for injuries he alleges he suffered while operating a forage wagon manufactured by defendant Deere in February of 1991. The accident which resulted in plaintiffs injuries occurred on a…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Joe R. Brown v. Britt O. Braddick, Joe R. Brown v. Britt O. BraddickCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1979
- Clayton Brokerage Co. v. ClementDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1980
- State Ex Rel. J.E. Dunn Construction Co. v. SprinkleMissouri Court of Appeals · 1983
- Bunting v. Gainsville Machine Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1971
- Prucha v. M & N Modern Hydraulic Press Co.District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 1977
3Cited by5 opinions
- Collins v. MullinsDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 1996
- Green v. Sadder Mouldings, Inc.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2004
- Duck v. M.L. WarrenDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 1995
- Nicklasch v. JLG Industries, Inc.District Court, S.D. Indiana · 1999
- Johnson v. Standex International Corp.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 1994