Legal Opinion
Claudio v. Sinclair Refining Co.
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided August 6, 1954No. Civ. A. No. 14413PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BRUCHHAUSEN, District Judge.
The cases submitted by the plaintiff are not in point. The recoveries therein were after trial. There is no authority for the relief sought, by way of a summary proceeding or motion, excepting where there is no genuine issue of fact, the Courts have entertained motions for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56, Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. 28 U.S.C.A. See Rackus v. Moore-McCormack, D.C., 85 F.Supp. 185; Brady v. Waterman, D.C., 10 F.R.D. 629.
The motion is denied without prejudice.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Rackus v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1949
- Brady v. Waterman S. S. Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1950
3Cited by5 opinions
- Dean v. Fishing Co. of Alaska, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2013
- Bloom v. Weeks Marine, Inc.District Court, M.D. Florida · 2002
- Dean v. Fishing Co. of AlaskaWashington Supreme Court · 2013
- Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. v. HowardCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2014
- Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. RigbyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012