Noble Roman's, Inc. v. Hattenhauer Distributing Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• “The limits and breadth of discovery expressed in Rule 26 are applicable to non-party discovery under Rule 45.”
• “Simply put, this court does not doubt it can issue a protective order as a means of enforcing the scope of discovery and its limit expressed in Rule 26(b).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Helena Agri-Enterprises, LLC v. Great Lakes Grain, LLC
  Sixth Circuit· 2021-02-10· cited 49×
• United States ex rel. Conroy v. Select Med. Corp.
  S.D. Indiana· 2018-04-02· cited 8×
• JWD Automotive, Inc. v. DJM Advisory Group LLC
  M.D. Florida· 2016-11-02· cited 4×

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Lexmark Int'l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 2014-03-25· cited 2,704×
• Baxter International, Incorporated v. Abbott Laboratories
  Seventh Circuit· 2002-07-16· cited 570×
• United States v. Alex J. Raineri
  Seventh Circuit· 1982-03-24· cited 140×
• City of Greenville, Illinois v. Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC
  Seventh Circuit· 2014-08-20· cited 54×
• Parker v. Four Seasons Hotels, Ltd.
  N.D. Illinois· 2013-05-06· cited 38×
• In re Grand Jury
  Third Circuit· 1980-04-17· cited 19×
• Jackson v. Brinker
  S.D. Indiana· 1993-03-19· cited 13×