Benisek v. Lamone

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that for purposes of discovery, a party has “control” □ over a document if it has the “legal right to obtain the documents requested on demand” or | otherwise may have the “practical ability” to do so

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

1 case in this archive cites this case.

• Gem Plumbing and Heating Services, LLC v. Rusty's, Inc; Michael J. Roderick; Thomas R. Hansen; Air Pros Ma, LLC; Michael Hansen; And Paul Neary
  Massachusetts Superior Court· 2024-06-04

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Soto v. City of Concord
  N.D. California· 1995-07-17· cited 813×
• St. Paul Reinsurance Co. v. Commercial Financial Corp.
  N.D. Iowa· 2000-11-22· cited 151×
• Bank of New York v. Meridien BIAO Bank Tanzania Ltd.
  S.D. New York· 1997-03-21· cited 145×
• Goodman v. Praxair Services, Inc.
  D. Maryland· 2009-07-07· cited 142×
• Golden Trade v. Lee Apparel Co.
  S.D. New York· 1992-08-17· cited 79×
• Partners v. Blumenthal
  S.D. New York· 2007-01-30· cited 73×
• Gross v. Lunduski
  W.D. New York· 2014-12-18· cited 38×
• Klesch & Co. v. Liberty Media Corp.
  D. Colorado· 2003-06-17· cited 28×
• Steele Software Systems, Corp. v. Dataquick Information Systems, Inc.
  D. Maryland· 2006-10-03· cited 22×
• New York v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.
  N.D. New York· 2006-01-09· cited 21×
• City Consumer Services, Inc. v. David G.
  D. Utah· 1983-12-21· cited 15×