Opinion · District Court, E.D. Tennessee

Lloyd v. Cessna Aircraft Co.

430 F. Supp. 25

Type
Opinion
Court
District Court, E.D. Tennessee
Jurisdiction
Tennessee
Date
1976-06-01
Topic
bankruptcy

How later courts describe this case

  • requiring "special need" to justify deposition in view of short notice afforded deposed party

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Lloyd v. Cessna Aircraft Co.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
11 opinions
LLOYD v. CESSNA AIRCRAFT CO., (E.D.Tenn. 1976)
430 F. Supp. 25
Marilyn LLOYD, etc., Plaintiff, v. CESSNA AIRCRAFT COMPANY, Defendant and
Third-party Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of America, Third-party
Defendant.
No. CIV-4-75-40.
United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee,
Winchester Division
June 1, 1976.
West Page 26
John C. Curtis and Charles P. Dupree, Chattanooga, Tenn., for plaintiff.

Paul R. Leitner and R. Vann Owens, Chattanooga, Tenn., for Cessna.

John L. Bowers, Jr., U.S. Atty., Knoxville, Tenn., Andrew J. Dilk (FAA), Jonathan M. Hoffman, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for the U.S.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
NEESE, District Judge.
On Wednesday, May 26, 1976 the defendant and third-party plaintiff served notice on adversary counsel in Chattanooga, Tennessee and Washington, D.C. that certain depositions would be taken in Los Angeles, California, commencing on Tuesday, June 2, 1976. The Court notices judicially that the intervening Monday, May 31, 1976 was observed as a national holiday, so that such adversary counsel had only two full working days' notice of depositions to be taken cross-country or half cross-country, respectively, for them.

There was no showing made of any special need for the taking of such depositions in such haste, and under the circumstances the notice given thereof was patently unreasonable, improper and invalid.Cf. Stover v. Universal Moulded Products Corp.,D.C.Pa. (1950),11 F.R.D. 90,91[6];Twardzik v. Sepauley,D.C.Pa. (1968),286 F. Supp. 346,350[7]. Upon the motion of the plaintiff, and for good cause shown, the Court hereby

ORDERS that such notice hereby is QUASHED, Rule26(c)(1), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Counsel for the defendant and third-party plaintiff shall forthwith engage adversary counsel in a telephone conference and undertake to agree orally upon a reasonable time for the taking of the depositions heretofore noticed.West Page 34