Lavelle Brown (Cross- Appellee) v. Krista Gilmore (Cross- Appellant)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the movant must show a “particularized, . . . discrete showing of need” for such discovery
• holding that, although Government suggested dismissal as a sanction for its refusal to comply with a challenged court order, Government could challenge that underlying order in ensuing appeal of dismissal
• recognizing that discovery “make[s] a trial less a game of blind man’s bluff and more a fair contest with the basic issues and facts disclosed to the fullest practicable extent”
• holding that “relevance or possible relevance” of material insufficient to show particularized need
• holding that avoidance of “delay and substantial costs . . . fall[s] short of proof that without [disclosure] a defense would be greatly prejudiced or that without reference to it an injustice would be done”
• finding that “disclosure of 20 business records independently generated and sought for legitimate purposes, would not seriously compromise the secrecy of the grand jury’s deliberations”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).