From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Baycol Products Litigation

United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Oct 21, 2002
MDL NO. 1431 (MJD/JGL), (Case No. 02-1085), (Case No. 01-2388) (D. Minn. Oct. 21, 2002)

Opinion

MDL NO. 1431 (MJD/JGL), (Case No. 02-1085), (Case No. 01-2388)

October 21, 2002


Pretrial Order No. 44


This matter is before the Court on defendants' motion to compel the depositions of Prem Gupta and Mark Hall, who were named as class representatives in the PSC's original and amended master class action complaints. Plaintiffs have moved to dismiss Gupta and Hall, without prejudice, from both the master class action and from the separate cases Gupta and Hall previously had filed.

After reviewing the briefs of the parties and hearing argument, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. Prem Gupta is dismissed, without prejudice, from the master class action and from Cohen, Gupta, et al. v. Bayer Corp. (Case No. 01-2388). As a condition of these dismissals, Ms. Gupta is required to appear for deposition by defendants on Tuesday, October 22, at a time and location to be agreed by the parties.

2. Mark Hall is dismissed, without prejudice, from the master class action. Further, the case of Hall v. Bayer Corp. (Case No. 02-1085) is dismissed without prejudice. As a condition of these dismissals, Mr. Hall is required to appear for deposition by defendants on Tuesday, October 22, at a time and location to be agreed by the parties.


Summaries of

In re Baycol Products Litigation

United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Oct 21, 2002
MDL NO. 1431 (MJD/JGL), (Case No. 02-1085), (Case No. 01-2388) (D. Minn. Oct. 21, 2002)
Case details for

In re Baycol Products Litigation

Case Details

Full title:In Re: BAYCOL PRODUCTS LITIGATION Hartman, v. Bayer Corp. (master class…

Court:United States District Court, D. Minnesota

Date published: Oct 21, 2002

Citations

MDL NO. 1431 (MJD/JGL), (Case No. 02-1085), (Case No. 01-2388) (D. Minn. Oct. 21, 2002)

Citing Cases

Howell Turpentine Co. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

In Tazewell Elec. Light & Power Co. v. Strother, 84 Fed.(2d) 327, where a sale was held to be that of the…