Skip to main content
· 9/21/1964

Hiebert v. United States

Citations

  • 235 F. Supp. 466
  • 1964 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8007

How courts have described this case

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

  • “The Court is reluctant to reward BMW for its inability or unwillingness to produce responsive information to Oscar’s discovery requests.”
  • “Plaintiff may seek leave to renew in the event that he can make a fuller showing that he meets the numerosity requirement of Rule 23(a).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Plummer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.