Balandran v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 148 F.3d 487 (5th Cir. 1998). · Go Syfert
Search
Balandran v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 148 F.3d 487 (5th Cir. 1998). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“confidential' does not necessarily mean 'privileged,”
30 citation events (18 in the last 25 years) across 16 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Shvartser v. Lekser (dcd, 2017-09-07)
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998 2012 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 18 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Shvartser v. Lekser
D.D.C. · 2017 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
confidential' does not necessarily mean 'privileged,
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Accent Delight International Ltd. v. Sotheby's
S.D.N.Y. · 2020 · confidence medium
Promising participants confidentiality in these proceedings “promotes the free flow of information that may result in the settlement of a dispute,” In re Grand Jury Subpoena Dated Dec. 17, 1996, 148 F.3d 487, 492 (5th Cir. 1998), and protecting the integrity of alternative dispute resolution generally, see e.g., In re Cnty. of Los Angeles, 223 F.3d 990 , 993 (9th Cir. 2000); Clark v. Stapleton Corp., 957 F.2d 745, 746 (10th Cir. 1992) (per curiam); Sheldone v. Pa. Tpk.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Geltzer v. Brizinova (In re Brizinova)
Bankr. E.D.N.Y. · 2017 · confidence medium
Promising participants confidentiality in these proceedings ‘promotes the free flow of information that may result in the settlement of a dispute.’” In re Teligent, 640 F.3d at 57 -58 (quoting In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 148 F.3d 487, 492 (5th Cir. 1998)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Facebook, Inc. v. Pacific Northwest Software, Inc.
9th Cir. · 2011 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Cf. In re Grand Jury Subpoena Dated Dec. 17, 1996, 148 F.3d 487, 491-93 (5th Cir.1998) (examining whether a federal statute created an evidentiary privilege).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Savage & Associates, P.C. v. K & L Gates LLP
2d Cir. · 2011 · confidence medium
Promising participants confidentiality in these proceedings “promotes the free flow of information that may result in the settlement of a dispute,” In re Grand Jury Subpoena Dated Dec. 17, 1996, 148 F.3d 487, 492 (5th Cir.1998), and protecting the integrity of alternative dispute resolution generally, see e.g., In re Cnty. of Los Angeles, 223 F.3d 990, 993 (9th Cir.2000); Clark v. Stapleton Corp., 957 F.2d 745, 746 (10th Cir.1992) (per curiam); Sheldone v. Pa. Tpk.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Facebook, Inc. v. Pacific Northwest Software, Inc.
9th Cir. · 2011 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Cf. In re Grand Jury Subpoena Dated Dec. 17, 1996, 148 F.3d 487, 491-93 (5th Cir.1998) (examining whether a federal statute created an evidentiary privilege).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Lawrence S. Bittaker v. Jeanne S. Woodford, Warden, California State Prison of San Quentin (2×)
9th Cir. · 2003 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Cf. In re Grand Jury Subpoena Dated Dec. 17, 1996, 148 F.3d 487, 492-93 (5th Cir.1998) (holding that federal statute that prohibited circulation of information outside of mediation proceedings did not create evidentiary privilege). 3 I am not even sure that we should be making any conclusions regarding the scope of the federal attorney-client privilege.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re: Anonymous v.
4th Cir. · 2002 · confidence medium
In re: Grand Jury Subpoena, 148 F.3d 487, 492-93 (5th Cir. 1998); see also Wilson v. Attaway, 757 F.2d 1227, 1245 (11th Cir. 1985) (holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by weighing confidentiality in mediation proceedings against public’s interest in insuring that "justice [is] done").
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In Re Anonymous, Office of the Circuit Mediator for the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, Amicus Curiae
4th Cir. · 2002 · confidence medium
In re: Grand Jury Subpoena,, 148 F.3d 487, 492-93 (5th Cir.1998); see also Wilson v. Attaway, 757 F.2d 1227, 1245 (11th Cir.1985) (holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by weighing confidentiality in mediation proceedings against public’s interest in insuring that “justice [is] done”).
cited Cited as authority (rule) In re: Grand Jury v.
8th Cir. · 2000 · confidence medium
In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 148 F.3d 487, 490 (5th Cir. 1998), cert. denied, 119 S. Ct. 1336 (1999); accord In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 655 F.2d 882, 884 (8th Cir. 1981).
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Edwards
M.D. La. · 1999 · confidence medium
Grand Jury Subpoena, 148 F.3d at 493 (emphasis provided).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Federal Deposit Insurance v. White
N.D. Tex. · 1999 · confidence medium
“Confidentiality is critical to the mediation process because it promotes the free flow of information that may result in the settlement of a dispute.” In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 148 F.3d 487, 492 (5th Cir.1998), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 119 S.Ct. 1336 , 143 L.Ed.2d 500 (1999), citing K.
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Edwards
M.D. La. · 1999 · confidence medium
Grand Jury Subpoena, 148 F.3d at 493 (emphasis provided). 44 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Olam v. Congress Mortgage Co.
N.D. Cal. · 1999 · confidence medium
Folb, 16 F.Supp.2d at 1171-72 ; United States v. Phoenix Union High School Dist., 681 F.2d 1235, 1237 (9th Cir.1982); Nguyen Da Yen v. Kissinger, 528 F.2d 1194, 1205 (9th Cir.1975); In re Grand Jury Subpoena Dated December 17, 1996, 148 F.3d 487, 492 (5th Cir.1998).
discussed Cited "see" Ceats, Inc. v. Continental Airlines, Inc. (2×)
Fed. Cir. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Grand Jury Subpoena Dated Dec. 17, 1996, 148 F.3d 487 , 492 (5th Cir.1998) (“Confidentiality is critical to the mediation process because it promotes the free flow of information that may result in the settlement of a dispute.”); 1 Alt.
cited Cited "see" Sampson v. School District of Lancaster
E.D. Pa. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Grand, Jury Subpoena Dated December 17, 1996, 148 F.3d 487, 493 (5th Cir.1998).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.
5th Cir. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 148 F.3d 487, 490 (5th Cir.1998), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 119 S.Ct. 1336 , 143 L.Ed.2d 500 (1999) (case not moot where court can still grant some relief by ordering documents returned or destroyed) (citing Church of Scientology of California v. United States, 506 U.S. 9, 13 , 113 S.Ct. 447 , 121 L.Ed.2d 313 (1992)).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Martin v. Lafon Nursing Facility of Holy Family, Inc.
E.D. La. · 2007 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also In re Grand Jury Subpoena Dated Dec. 17, 1996, 148 F.3d 487 , 492 n. 3 (5th Cir. 1998).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Joe BALANDRAN; Dolores Balandran, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee
97-50013.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Jul 24, 1998.
148 F.3d 487
John R. Harrison, Jr., San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiffs-Appellants., Brian Lynn Blakeley, Blakeley & Associates, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appel-lee.
DeMOSS, Dennis, Per Curiam, Rosenthal.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

In October 1996, this case was tried to a jury in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. The jury found that the damage to the Balandrán home was caused by a leaky sewer line and awarded the Balandrans $66,500. Shortly thereafter, Safeco moved for judgment as a matter of law asserting that the Balandrans’ claim was excluded from coverage under Subsection (h) of the insurance policy in question. The district court granted the motion and entered judgment in favor of Safeco. The Balandrans appealed, claiming that Subsection (h) does not exclude from coverage-losses that fall within the accidental discharge peril.

On November 18,1997, this Court certified the following question to the Supreme Court of Texas.

Whether the exclusion in Subsection (h) of the 1991 Texas Standard Homeowner Policy — Form B excludes from coverage damage to a dwelling caused by a movement of its foundation that was caused by an underground plumbing leak?

The factual circumstances and procedural background involved in this controversy are fully described in our published opinion certifying this question. Balandran v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America, 129 F.3d 747 (5th Cir.1997).

On July 3," 1998, the Supreme Court of Texas issued its opinion and judgment in response to our certified question, holding that:

1) Exclusion 1(h) of the 1991 Texas Standard Homeowner Policy — Form B does not exclude from coverage damage to a dwelling caused by a movement of its foundation that was caused by an underground plumbing leak.
2) Joe Balandrán and Dolores Balandrán shall recover, from Safeco Insurance . Company of America, which shall pay the costs in this Court.

See Balandran v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America, 972 F.Supp. 738 (Tex.S.Ct.1998).

In light of the decision of the Supreme Court of Texas, we now vacate the judgment entered by the district court in favor of Safe-co; and remand this case to the district court for entry of judgment on the jury verdict consistent with the decision of the Supreme Court of Texas.