TOMPKINS v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, 2:12-CV-1481-CMK. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20150507a09
Visitors: 12
Filed: May 06, 2015
Latest Update: May 06, 2015
Summary: ORDER CRAIG M. KELLISON , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff brings this civil action under the Federal Employers Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. 51, et seq. This matter is before the court on the parties' joint request for an in camera review of documents. At issue is whether certain entries in plaintiff's calendar are subject to the attorney-client privilege. Having reviewed the disputed calendar entries in camera, the court finds that the following entries are privileged: May 16, 2011; May 17, 201
Summary: ORDER CRAIG M. KELLISON , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff brings this civil action under the Federal Employers Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. 51, et seq. This matter is before the court on the parties' joint request for an in camera review of documents. At issue is whether certain entries in plaintiff's calendar are subject to the attorney-client privilege. Having reviewed the disputed calendar entries in camera, the court finds that the following entries are privileged: May 16, 2011; May 17, 2011..
More
ORDER
CRAIG M. KELLISON, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff brings this civil action under the Federal Employers Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. §§ 51, et seq. This matter is before the court on the parties' joint request for an in camera review of documents. At issue is whether certain entries in plaintiff's calendar are subject to the attorney-client privilege. Having reviewed the disputed calendar entries in camera, the court finds that the following entries are privileged: May 16, 2011; May 17, 2011; May 31, 2011; July 18, 2011; August 18, 2011; March 2, 2012; May 9, 2012; June 26, 2012; October 5, 2012; October 10, 2012; October 12, 2012; and November 6, 2012.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate Doc. 48 as a pending motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
