Boynton v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 672, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2002 (D. Mass. Oct. 21, 1940). · Go Syfert
Search
Boynton v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 672, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2002 (D. Mass. Oct. 21, 1940). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Gilbert MH LLC v. Gilbert Fam. Hosp. LLC, No. 2:18-cv-04046 (D. Ariz. May 19, 2020)
How cited ↗
Cited for
At page 460 stating that diligence may be shown by a movant 2 demonstrating (1) that it was diligent in assisting in the creation of a workable Rule 16 3 order; (21 citing case1 citing court put it this way
  • Gilbert MH LLC v. Gilbert Fam. Hosp. LLC, No. 2:18-cv-04046 (D. Ariz. May 19, 2020).
    (stating that diligence may be shown by a movant 2 demonstrating (1) that it was diligent in assisting in the creation of a workable Rule 16 3 order; (2)
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
BOYNTON
v.
R. J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO CO.
No. 672.
District Court, D. Massachusetts.
Oct 21, 1940.
Published opinion
1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2002
Gordon D. Boynton, of Boston, Mass., pro se., Harry B. White, of Boston, Mass., for defendant.
McLellan.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
McLELLAN, District Judge.

The plaintiff having made a motion in writing that the Court order that the deposition of Louis Feldman be not taken by the defendant, the motion appeared on today’s list. The plaintiff did not appear and the defendant did. The motion accordingly is denied, but its denial is not to be understood as a precedent upon the question whether an expert witness of one of the parties should be compelled to express his professional opinion in connection with a deposition taken by the other party.