O'Connor

O'Connor v. Boeing North American, Inc.

Good Law
1999 WL 203524·185 F.R.D. 272·1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11161
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaApril 2, 1999No. CV 97-1554-ABC(RCx)California5,908 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Chapman, J.

PROCEEDINGS: (1) PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES RE THE MANNER OF PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES AND DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES; AND (2) DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

On March 5, 1999, plaintiffs filed a notice of motion and motion to compel further responses to interrogatories regarding the manner of production of documents and for attorney’s fees, a joint stipulation, and plaintiffs’ exhibits to joint stipulation, with supporting declaration of Kim A. Seefeld. The defendants filed the declaration of William Schofield in opposition to plaintiffs’ motion to compel, with numerous supporting exhibits, and defendants’ exhibits to joint discovery stipulation. On March 24, 1999, both parties filed supplemental memoranda in support of their positions.

On March 4,1999, defendants filed a notice of motion and motion to compel answers to interrogatories and production of documents by plaintiffs, a joint stipulation, and the declaration of Barry N. Endick in support of defendants, motion. 1 The plaintiffs filed the declarations of William Thomas Nevin and Kim…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.