29 C.F.R. § 2.24
Procedure in the event of an adverse ruling
If the court or other authority declines to stay the effect of the demand in response to a request made in accordance with § 2.23 pending receipt of instructions, or if the court or other authority rules that the demand must be complied with irrespective of instructions not to produce the material or disclose the information sought, the employee or former employee upon whom the demand has been made shall respectfully decline to comply with the demand, “United States ex rel Touhy v. Ragen,” 340 US. 462.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1
case, 2004–2004 · leading case: Metcalfe v. Ultimate Sys. Ltd., 346 F. Supp. 2d 950 (N.D. Ohio 2004).
Metcalfe v. Ultimate Sys. Ltd., 346 F. Supp. 2d 950 (N.D. Ohio 2004). “” 29 C.F.R. § 2.24 . The DOL regulations at issue here are substantively identical to those in Touhy .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.