Warner Bros. Pictures Distributing Corp. v. Lambros

How courts have described this case

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

• \[M]ost courts have held that a petitioner must make a particularized showing that the testimony needs to be taken in advance of the contemplated action.\
• \[M]ost courts have held that a petitioner must make a particularized showing that the testimony needs to be taken in advance of the contemplated action.\
• “The purpose of Rule 27 is simply to preserve evidence that otherwise would be in danger of being lost.”
• “The purpose of Rule 27 is simply to preserve evidence that otherwise would be in danger of being lost.”
• “Petitioners’ broad request for relief falls short of the Rule 27 requirement that a petitioner must make a narrowly-tailored showing of ‘the substance of the testimony which the petitioner expects to elicit from each’ person deposed.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).