Legal Opinion
Previn v. Barell
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided June 29, 1953No. Civ. A. No. 12678PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BRUCHHAUSEN, District Judge.
Plaintiffs move, pursuant to Rule 39(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., for an order granting a jury trial. It is conceded that they failed to demand such trial within the time prescribed by Rule 38(b). They contend that the delay was inadvertent and urge the Court to exercise its discretion in their favor.
The plaintiffs sue for damages in the sum of $202,549, arising out of the alleged fraudulent conspiracy of the defendants. In substance, the plaintiffs state that they owned a controlling interest in a plastics corporation, the assets…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- S. S. Kresge Co. v. HollandCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1946
- In Re PrevinCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1953
- Hargreaves v. Roxy Theatre, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1940
- Paper Stylists, Inc. v. Fitchburg Paper Co.District Court, N.D. New York · 1949
- Bowles v. SamonasDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1946
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ohlinger v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Idaho · 1955
- Burgess v. HendleySupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 1991
- (PC) Williamson v. StewartDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2024
- Block v. FishmanDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1985
- Shannon Ray, Khala Taylor, Peter Robinson, Katherine Sebbane, and Rudy Barajas, Individually and on Behalf of All Those Similarly Situated v. National Collegiate Athletic AssociationDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2026