8 Cited authorities

United States v. Kordel
397 U.S. 1 (1970) Cited 772 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding the United States Food and Drug Administration's routine investigation was not done solely to obtain evidence supporting criminal charges
Braswell v. United States
487 U.S. 99 (1988) Cited 383 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that neither a corporation nor its representatives have a Fifth Amendment privilege
United States v. White
322 U.S. 694 (1944) Cited 604 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination “is a purely personal one” that “cannot be utilized by or on behalf of any organization, such as a corporation”
In re Livent, Inc. Noteholders Securities Litig.
151 F. Supp. 2d 371 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) Cited 264 times
Holding that tortious interference of contract claim was preempted by SLUSA because plaintiffs alleged elsewhere that defendants engaged in a fraudulent scheme and proof of the scheme was necessary to proving tortious interference with contract
U.S. v. Blackman
72 F.3d 1418 (9th Cir. 1995) Cited 74 times
Stating that we review de novo the district court's rulings on the scope of the attorney-client privilege because they involve "mixed questions of law and fact" and that the burden of persuasion is on the party seeking to establish that the privilege applies
S.E.C. v. Leach
156 F. Supp. 2d 491 (E.D. Pa. 2001) Cited 8 times
Answering a complaint
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 361,663 times 960 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 163,974 times 197 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

eBay Inc. v. Digital Point Solutions, Inc. et al

8 Cited authorities

Holding the United States Food and Drug Administration's routine investigation was not done solely to obtain evidence supporting criminal charges

Holding that neither a corporation nor its representatives have a Fifth Amendment privilege

Holding that Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination “is a purely personal one” that “cannot be utilized by or on behalf of any organization, such as a corporation”

Holding that tortious interference of contract claim was preempted by SLUSA because plaintiffs alleged elsewhere that defendants engaged in a fraudulent scheme and proof of the scheme was necessary to proving tortious interference with contract

Stating that we review de novo the district court's rulings on the scope of the attorney-client privilege because they involve "mixed questions of law and fact" and that the burden of persuasion is on the party seeking to establish that the privilege applies

Answering a complaint

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."