27 Cited authorities

Roper v. Simmons
543 U.S. 551 (2005) Cited 3,500 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding "that the death penalty cannot be imposed upon juvenile offenders"
Jaffee v. Redmond
518 U.S. 1 (1996) Cited 1,172 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that "confidential communications between a licensed psychotherapist and her patients in the course of diagnosis or treatment are protected from compelled disclosure under Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence"
Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court
426 U.S. 394 (1976) Cited 2,085 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that "as a means of implementing the rule that the writ will issue only in extraordinary circumstances," the party seeking the writ must "have no other adequate means to attain the relief he desires"
Hickman v. Taylor
329 U.S. 495 (1947) Cited 6,496 times 31 Legal Analyses
Holding in the context of the work product privilege that the adversary system requires a party's attorney be permitted to “assemble information, sift what he considers to be the relevant from the irrelevant facts, prepare his legal theories and plan his strategy without undue and needless interference”
Trop v. Dulles
356 U.S. 86 (1958) Cited 1,904 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding that a statute is non-penal "if it imposes a disability, not to punish but to accomplish some other legitimate governmental purpose,"
Soto v. City of Concord
162 F.R.D. 603 (N.D. Cal. 1995) Cited 1,215 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a relevant matter is "any matter that bears on, or that reasonably could lead to other matters that could bear on, any issue that is or may be in the case."
Gomez v. Vernon
255 F.3d 1118 (9th Cir. 2001) Cited 632 times
Holding that "repeated threats of transfer because of [the plaintiff's] complaints about the administration of the [prison] library" were sufficient to ground a retaliation claim
Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. v. U.S. Dist. Court for the Dist. of Mont.
403 F.3d 1042 (9th Cir. 2005) Cited 556 times
Holding "that boilerplate objections or blanket refusals inserted into a response to a Rule 34 request for production of documents are insufficient to assert a privilege"
United States v. Reynolds
345 U.S. 1 (1953) Cited 733 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that the state secrets privilege is guided by a "formula of compromise"
Sanchez v. City of Santa Ana
936 F.2d 1027 (9th Cir. 1990) Cited 670 times
Holding that the district court had the authority to correct a prior judgment under Rule 60 since there was no reason in the record to doubt the district judge's statements of his prior intent
Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 Cited 95,025 times 653 Legal Analyses
Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37
Rule 33 - Interrogatories to Parties
Fed. R. Civ. P. 33 Cited 10,899 times 21 Legal Analyses
Adopting Rule 30(b)

Morales v. Beard, et al

27 Cited authorities

Holding "that the death penalty cannot be imposed upon juvenile offenders"

Holding that "confidential communications between a licensed psychotherapist and her patients in the course of diagnosis or treatment are protected from compelled disclosure under Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence"

Holding that "as a means of implementing the rule that the writ will issue only in extraordinary circumstances," the party seeking the writ must "have no other adequate means to attain the relief he desires"

Holding that a statute is non-penal "if it imposes a disability, not to punish but to accomplish some other legitimate governmental purpose,"

Holding that a relevant matter is "any matter that bears on, or that reasonably could lead to other matters that could bear on, any issue that is or may be in the case."

Holding that "repeated threats of transfer because of [the plaintiff's] complaints about the administration of the [prison] library" were sufficient to ground a retaliation claim

Holding "that boilerplate objections or blanket refusals inserted into a response to a Rule 34 request for production of documents are insufficient to assert a privilege"

Holding that the state secrets privilege is guided by a "formula of compromise"

Holding that the district court had the authority to correct a prior judgment under Rule 60 since there was no reason in the record to doubt the district judge's statements of his prior intent

Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37

Adopting Rule 30(b)