Plaintiffs Respond to Motion for Sanctions, Defend Pleadings in Ohio Case
December 22, 2010
DOCUMENTS
- Motion for Protective Order
- Motion for Sanctions
- Opposition
CLEVELAND -- Parties in an Ohio case alleging personal injury and property damage claims have exchanged briefing on whether the plaintiffs have properly complied with discovery orders, with the plaintiffs arguing that the court has already recognized that they will not be able to identify every chemical component in gasoline or diesel fuel. Baker, et al. v. Chevron USA Inc., et al., No. 05-227 (S.D. Ohio).
In a Dec. 15 opposition filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, the plaintiffs contend that they responded to the defendant's interrogatories with guidance from the court and, as …
UPCOMING CONFERENCES
HarrisMartin's New Jersey Asbestos Litigation Conference
February 27, 2025 - New Brunswick, NJ
Hyatt Regency New Brunswick
HarrisMartin’s Artificial Stone Silicosis Epidemic Litigation Conference
January 10, 2025 - Long Beach, CA
The Westin Long Beach