Legal Opinion
Drummond Co. v. Collingsworth
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided March 15, 2016No. Nos. 14-15722, 14-15749PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ED CARNES, Chief Judge:
Subpoenas seeking documents were issued to an attorney and his law firm who are not parties to this lawsuit. They filed a third-party motion to quash on work product grounds. After the district court denied their motion, instead of producing the subpoenaed documents, they appealed and also filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. The defendants in the underlying lawsuit filed their own appeal from the denial of the motion to quash even though the subpoenas were not addressed to them and they did not object in the district court. As you might imagine, this appeal…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. RisjordSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Cobbledick v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. CarpenterSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- United States v. RyanSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Edwards v. Prime, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2010
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Managed Care Advisory Group, LLC v. Cigna Healthcare, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2019
- Keith Stansell v. Samark Jose Lopez BelloCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2024
- Kimberly Regenesis, LLC v. Lee CountyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2023
- Rosner v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2020
- Martin v. HoustonDistrict Court, M.D. Alabama · 2016
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.