Hickman v. Taylor
329 U.S. 495 (1947) Cited 6,487 times 31 Legal AnalysesHolding 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”
Sporck v. Peil
759 F.2d 312 (3d Cir. 1985) Cited 395 times 8 Legal AnalysesHolding that the selection process of already-produced documents in preparing a witness for deposition constitutes attorney work product
Mapother v. Department of Justice
3 F.3d 1533 (D.C. Cir. 1993) Cited 249 timesHolding that to invoke Exemption 7 the agency must show that their disclosure " could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings that are pending or reasonably anticipated"
Montrose Chemical Corp. of California v. Train
491 F.2d 63 (D.C. Cir. 1974) Cited 191 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding that Exemption 5 protected a factual summary of a publicly available record
Dir. v. Vinson Elkins
124 F.3d 1304 (D.C. Cir. 1997) Cited 83 timesHolding that a party does not demonstrate substantial need when it merely seeks corroborative evidence
James Julian, Inc. v. Raytheon Co.
93 F.R.D. 138 (D. Del. 1982) Cited 101 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that a binder of documents selected by counsel was protected from disclosure because "the process of selection and distillation is often more critical than pure legal research"
United States ex rel. Bagley v. TRW Inc.
212 F.R.D. 554 (C.D. Cal. 2003) Cited 30 timesFinding that the disclosure statement contained facts "interwoven with analysis, opinion, and conclusions" and that the "selection, organization, and characterization" of facts revealed the mental impressions and opinions of the relator and his counsel
U.S. ex Rel. Yannacopoulos v. General Dynamics
231 F.R.D. 378 (N.D. Ill. 2005) Cited 13 timesAnalyzing portions of the written disclosure and determining that some portions constituted opinion work product while others constituted fact work product
United States ex rel. Burns v. A.D. Roe Co.
904 F. Supp. 592 (W.D. Ky. 1995) Cited 17 timesConcluding that the disclosure statement was "simply a recitation of factual information" and was discoverable because the requesting party had met its burden to have it produced
U.S. ex Rel. Pogue v. Diabetes Treatment Centers of America
Civil Action File No. 99-3298 (RCL), (Part of 2001-MS-50) (RCL) (D.D.C. May. 17, 2004) Cited 8 timesCivil Action File No. 99-3298 (RCL), (Part of 2001-MS-50) (RCL). May 17, 2004 ORDER GRANTING RELATOR'S SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION TO MODIFY 1997 PROTECTIVE ORDER ROYCE LAMBERTH, District Judge It is hereby ORDERED that (1) The following sentence is stricken from the Protective Order in this case: "However, CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION shall not be disclosed in any manner to the named Relator except as agreed upon by the parties /or by further order." (2) The following language is to be incorporated into the
Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 Cited 94,611 times 650 Legal AnalysesAdopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37
Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters
Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 Cited 38,855 times 316 Legal AnalysesPermitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"
Section 3729 - False claims
31 U.S.C. § 3729 Cited 6,712 times 625 Legal AnalysesHolding liable "any person" who knowingly causes false claims to be presented
Section 3730 - Civil actions for false claims
31 U.S.C. § 3730 Cited 5,351 times 430 Legal AnalysesGranting the government primary responsibility for conducting suit