14 Cited authorities

Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehart
467 U.S. 20 (1984) Cited 2,591 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that a court may prohibit a newspaper that is party to a case from publishing information obtained through the discovery process
United States v. Nobles
422 U.S. 225 (1975) Cited 2,165 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that counsel's attempt to make testimonial use of work product materials at criminal trial waived protection
Gannett Co. v. Depasquale
443 U.S. 368 (1979) Cited 970 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the public has no constitutional right to attend pre-trial proceedings
U.S. v. Dunkel
927 F.2d 955 (7th Cir. 1991) Cited 2,308 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that "Judges are not like pigs, hunting for truffles buried in" the record
Virgin Atlantic Airways v. Nat. Mediation Bd.
956 F.2d 1245 (2d Cir. 1992) Cited 2,153 times
Holding that "[e]ven if Rule 54(b) allows parties to request district courts to revisit earlier rulings, the moving party must do so within the strictures of the law of the case doctrine"
Hazel-Atlas Co. v. Hartford Co.
322 U.S. 238 (1944) Cited 1,069 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that federal courts have the inherent power to grant relief against judgments for "after-discovered fraud"
Simpson v. Lear Astronics Corporation
77 F.3d 1170 (9th Cir. 1996) Cited 515 times
Holding that a party who "fails to file timely objections to a magistrate judge's nondispositive order with the district judge to whom the case is assigned forfeits its right to appellate review of that order"
Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp.
892 F.2d 1115 (1st Cir. 1989) Cited 378 times
Holding that fraud on the court must be demonstrated "clearly and convincingly"
Securities Exchange Commission v. Strauss
09 Civ. 4150 (RMB)(HBP) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 28, 2009) Cited 41 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that notes taken by SEC staff are "classic work-product," even though they were taken by SEC attorneys during the interviews preceding the formal initiation of the litigation, because they were generated "in order to provide the Commission with information so that it could make the determination whether to proceed with litigation in this matter."
Ball v. Interoceanica Corp.
71 F.3d 73 (2d Cir. 1995) Cited 49 times
Denying Rule 59 motion, quoting above Federal Practice & Procedure language
Rule 1 - Scope and Purpose
Fed. R. Civ. P. 1 Cited 15,870 times 52 Legal Analyses
Recognizing the federal rules of civil procedure should be employed to promote the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding"

Chevron Corporation v. Donziger et al

14 Cited authorities

Holding that a court may prohibit a newspaper that is party to a case from publishing information obtained through the discovery process

Holding that counsel's attempt to make testimonial use of work product materials at criminal trial waived protection

Holding that the public has no constitutional right to attend pre-trial proceedings

Holding that "Judges are not like pigs, hunting for truffles buried in" the record

Holding that "[e]ven if Rule 54(b) allows parties to request district courts to revisit earlier rulings, the moving party must do so within the strictures of the law of the case doctrine"

Holding that federal courts have the inherent power to grant relief against judgments for "after-discovered fraud"

Holding that a party who "fails to file timely objections to a magistrate judge's nondispositive order with the district judge to whom the case is assigned forfeits its right to appellate review of that order"

Holding that fraud on the court must be demonstrated "clearly and convincingly"

Denying Rule 59 motion, quoting above Federal Practice & Procedure language

Recognizing the federal rules of civil procedure should be employed to promote the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding"