Asea, Inc. v. Southern Pacific Transportation Company, a Corporation, and Harbor Belt Line, a Partnership

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, to comply with this rule, the party must actually conduct a 8 reasonable inquiry
• holding it was not abuse of district court’s discretion to direct that nonparty witness be 4 deposed in Sweden, where witness resided, to protect witness from burden of traveling overseas
• noting a responding 15 party must make a “reasonable inquiry” and access “readily obtainable’” information sufficient to 16 enable him to admit or deny the matter
• vacating 3 district court's order deeming RFAs admitted because it was a “severe sanction” that required a 4 showing “that a party has intentionally disregarded the obligations imposed by Rule 36(a
• vacating 24 district court’s order deeming RFAs admitted because it was a “severe sanction” that 25 required a showing “that that a party has intentionally disregarded the obligations imposed 26 by Rule 36(a
• “[R]estricting the district court’s discretion [as to Rule 37 sanctions] would reduce 15 a litigant’s obligation to make ‘reasonable inquiry’ into a mere semantic exercise, and thus severely 16 undermine the policy embodied in Rule 36(a).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).