Skip to main content
· 2/15/2008

Tarte v. United States

Citations

  • 249 F.R.D. 856
  • 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11629
  • 2008 WL 449945

How courts have described this case

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

  • compelling production of documents relating to defendants’ business or corporate structure such as articles of incorporation, corporate charters, by-laws, etc.
  • “Evidence pertaining to aggregate reserve information, however, is discoverable and generally not protected by the work product doctrine or the attorney-client privilege.”
  • “The scope of discovery under Rule 26(b) is extremely broad”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rosenbaum

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.