United States v. Vernon Cab Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• “[NJothing precludes a deposition . . . in conjunction with [contention] 30 interrogatories”
• stating, in the context of a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition, that “[i]t is of no consequence that contention interrogatories may be the more appropriate route to obtain the information as nothing precludes a deposition either in lieu of or in conjunction with such interrogatories”
• defendant’s corporate representative was deposed but refused to answer factual basis questions which had not been answered in written discovery
• “As courts have held contention interrogatories seeking the factual bases for allegations would not encroach on protected information, . . . it is not apparent how the same information would be otherwise unavailable through questions posed to a deponent in the course of a deposition.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).