Skip to main content
· 4/15/1996

United States v. Strickling

Citations

  • 924 F. Supp. 1057
  • 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6280
  • 1996 WL 227356

How courts have described this case

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

  • finding that “defendant did confer with plaintiff as required by the Federal Rules” based on “evidence that the parties exchanged letters regarding several ongoing discovery issues”
  • identity of law firm not privileged

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lungstrum

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.