Holt-Orsted v. City of Dickson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that orders allowing for the discovery of allegedly privileged information are not immediately appealable where the privilege holders are parties to the underlying litigation, as the parties can sufficiently protect their rights in a post-judgment appeal
• recognizing that Perlman jurisdiction remains when a nonparty asserts a privilege
• “[W]here the privilege holder is a party to the litigation with recourse in a post-judgment appeal . . . Perlman no longer affords jurisdiction to hear this interlocutory appeal.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).