Skip to main content
D. Kansas· 5/1/1995

Gheesling v. Chater

Citations

  • 162 F.R.D. 649
  • 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11487
  • 68 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 965
  • 1995 WL 472741

How courts have described this case

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

  • when party seeking discovery fails to show relevance and court cannot otherwise determine how information sought is relevant, court will not compel requested discovery.
  • limiting scope to plaintiffs employing unit
  • limiting scope to plaintiff's employing unit

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Reid

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.