MONTECATINI EDISON S. P. A.

v.

E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS & CO.

Citator

Cited By (32 total)

• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sears, 421 U.S. 132 (U.S. 1975)
  …anda prepared by an attorney in contemplation of litigation which set forth the attorney’s theory of the case and his litigation strategy. In re Natta, 410 F. 2d 187 (CA3), cert. denied sub nom. Montecatini Edison v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 396 U. S. 836 (1969); State ex rel. Dudek v. Circuit Court for Milwaukee [*155] County, 34 Wis. 2d 559, 150 N. W. 2d 387 (1967); Hickman v. Taylor, supra, at 510-511. B Applying these principles to the memoranda sought by Sears, it becomes clear that Exemption…
• Mead Data Cent., Inc. v. United States Dep't of the Air Force, 566 F.2d 242 (D.C. Cir. 1977)
  …r, 329 U.S. 495, 67 S.Ct. 385, 91 L.Ed. 451 (1947); J. H. Rutter Rex Mfg. Co. v. [*253] NLRB, 473 F. 2d 223, 234 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 822, 94 S.Ct. 120, 38 L.Ed.2d 55 (1973); In re Natta, 410 F. 2d 187, 191-94 (3rd Cir.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 836, 90 S.Ct. 95, 24 L.Ed.2d 87 (1969). . 421 U.S. at 154, 95 S.Ct. 1504. The Court noted that the legislative history of exemption five explicitly provides that it “would include . . documents which would come within the attorney-client privilege if a…
• United States v. Heath, 580 F.2d 1011 (10th Cir. 1978)
  …lear to the jury that the burden was on the government to prove specific intent beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury could return a verdict of guilty; that it was not prejudicial. See McCarty v. United States, 409 F. 2d 793 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 836, 90 S.Ct. 95, 24 L.Ed.2d 87 (1969), and Beck v. United States, 305 F. 2d 595 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 890, 83 S.Ct. 186, 9 L.Ed.2d 123 (1962), which hold similarly in regard to the specific “natural and probable consequences” language. In…