Lizza & Sons, Inc. v. Diminico & Pallotta, Inc.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
1Opinion of the Court
ALDRICH, District Judge.
1. The objections of both defendants to interrogatories are overruled, except as follows:
a) No. 3 and No. 9 to Diminico & Pal-lotta, Inc. and No. 3 to Continental Casualty — In answering these questions defendants need not summarize or state substance of written communications, but need only state where originals or copies may be inspected. Said interrogatories are to be restricted to the year 1955.
b) Nos. 6, 17 and 18 to Diminico & Pallotta, Inc. — Sustained.
2. Certain interrogatories call for a rather simple conclusion of law. or involve such. If, but only if, a…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Humphreys Exterminating Co. v. PoulterDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1974
- White v. BeloginisDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1971
- Alight Solutions, LLC v. ThomsonDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2021