Perrignon

Perrignon v. Bergen Brunswig Corp.

Good Law
25 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 780·77 F.R.D. 455
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 12, 1978No. C-77-0069-CBRCalifornia3,744 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Renfrew, J.

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION

On August 16, 1977, plaintiffs filed a motion for an order compelling answers to deposition questions, which the Court granted on October 13,1977. Although this case was subsequently resolved by settlement after several days of jury trial, the Court believes that since the motion raised important questions under Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, it should express its views in a written opinion.

Plaintiff Janine Perrignon is a former employee of defendants Bergen Brunswig Corporation (“BBC”) and Health Applications Systems, Inc. (“HAS”). She and plaintiff Jamie Perrignon, her daughter, allege that defendants BBC, HAS, Paid Prescriptions, Inc. (“PPI”), Mazor, Barnes & Associates, and Joseph A. Mazor violated her privacy rights and intentionally harassed her because of her cooperation with *457 state and federal officials who were investigating certain practices of defendants, BBC, HAS, and PPI, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2520 , 42 U.S.C. § 1985 (2), Cal. Const, art. I, § 1, Cal.Penal Code §§ 630 et seq., and Cal.Civil Code §§ 45 and 46.

More specifically, plaintiffs allege that, during the course of her employment with defendants, plaintiff…

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.