Legal Opinion
Mueller Co. v. United States Pipe & Foundry Co.
District Court, D. New Hampshire
Decided January 10, 2005No. CIV. 03-170-JDPublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
DICLERICO, District Judge.
The plaintiffs, Mueller Co. and Mueller International, Inc. (collectively, “Mueller”) object to the magistrate’s order of August 6, 2004. That order reconsidered the magistrate’s earlier denial of Mueller’s motion to file a supplemental complaint but nevertheless disallowed the filing on the basis of its futility. The defendant, United States Pipe & Foundry Co. (“U.S.Pipe”) has filed a response to Mueller’s objections.
Standard of Review
“Upon motion of a party the court may, on reasonable notice and upon such terms as are just, permit the party to serve a…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Higgins v. New Balance Athletic Shoe, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1999
- Mary C. Quaratino v. Tiffany & Co., Michael Eiring, and David WrightCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- Florida v. MellonSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Frank H. Glatt v. Chicago Park District, Jim Halpern, and Robert NelsonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
- B. H. Bunn Co., Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross v. Aaa Replacement Parts Co., Inc., Defendants-Appellees-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1971
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- United States Ex Rel. Gadbois v. PharMerica Corp.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2015
- Hall v. Norfolk Southern Railway CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2006
- Noonan v. Wonderland Greyhound Park Realty LLCDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2010
- Graham v. SabolDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2010
- Lorettann Gascard v. Franklin Pierce UniversityDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2015
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.