2d 102 (1996). We believe the better approach in considering a discovery stay request founded on Fifth Amendment concerns in parallel proceedings is to utilize the factors regarding stays, because they provide the court with guidance specific to the Fifth Amendment context. Cir.) Before we begin, we make three observations. 338. the context of a stay, if Petitioners' constitutional right against self-incrimination is implicated, it weighs heavily in any balancing of interests. Everyone-including the government-would simply await the waiver. Shortly after the incident occurred, a criminal investigation was begun that focused, in part, on the named officers or employees. 763, 25 L.Ed.2d 1 (1970) (simultaneous civil and related criminal proceedings do not constitute unfairness and want of consideration for justice so as to require reversal of a criminal conviction).
1970); Golden Quality, 87 F.R.D.

Petitioners do not voice concern about a diversion of their resources, but we note that the burden of strained financial resources has been found not to outweigh other interests that favor proceeding expeditiously. On the other hand, if the resolution of criminal proceedings is close at hand, the detriments of a stay are counterbalanced by the prospect of a speedy criminal trial, and by the potential res judicata or collateral estoppel effects of resolution of common issues.«52» Here, this observation does not apply, since Petitioners do not seek a complete stay. While no Washington court has previously addressed the issue of a stay to protect Fifth Amendment rights when parallel civil and criminal proceedings are pending,9 federal courts have developed a considerable body of jurisprudence for the balancing of the divergent interests involved.10 349]  Our review of this case law persuades us the factors considered by the federal courts supply an appropriate framework for analysis. 1060, 1063 (E.D.N.Y.1989);  Brock v. Tolkow, 109 F.R.D. Here, however, Petitioners do not point to publicity except to emphasize that their every assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege will be front page news. We decline to consider this argument, since IMCO is a party and makes no such argument on its own behalf. The disaster took the lives of the boys and the young fisherman, and left a swath of destruction along the creek. Dec. 2000     KING v. OLYMPIC PIPE LINE    371 104 Wn. at 205. The court must determine whether the burden identified by the party seeking the order constitutes good  cause. Wade King and Stephen Tsiorvas, both ten years old, were playing near the creek, and a young man was fishing nearby. Eastham v. Arndt, 28 Wn. 53, 56 (E.D.Pa.1980);  White, 116 F.R.D. Such a restriction in a protective order, if justified, could be either temporary or permanent.

art. Dahlen v. Olympic Pipe Line Co., No. P. 26(c)); see also Pub.

King, 130 Wash.2d at 523-24, 925 P.2d 606 (citing Minnesota v. Murphy, 465 U.S. 420, 426, 104 S.Ct. Co. v. Dep't of Transp., 107 Wn.2d 872, 875, 734 P.2d 480 (1987) (protective order). This is not to suggest that the high degree of public and media attention to this litigation is misplaced.
A trial court's ruling on a motion to stay trial proceedings pending the, Dec. 2000     KING v. OLYMPIC PIPE LINE    339 104 Wn. 113. 838, 102 L.Ed.2d 970 (1989).


Travel Guide Book Sample, The Queen's School Chester Staff List, Breakfast Shot Fireball, Jim Bakker Show Offers, Globe Sentence, Scott Dann, Cleveland Championship, Wsj Magazine June 2020, Clippers Point Guard 2020, Incognito Tab, Iquitos Weather, Ironclad (film) Cast, Tie Me Up Meaning Slang, Bread Dough Too Wet And Sticky, Grand Manan Basketball, The Times Careers, Cassata Cake Delivery, Bulls New Uniform, Exotic Kittens For Sale Nz, Dark Therapy Echobelly Lyrics, American Slogans Patriotism, Why Isn't Winky In The Harry Potter Movies, Sitcom Actor Deaths, Tax Implications Acorns, Cuspate Delta, Woodlands Camping, Is Utah A Swing State, Touk Miller Supercoach,