Churchward International Steel Co. v. Bethlehem Steel Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
In Equity. Bill by the Churchward International Steel Company against the Bethlehem Steel Company. Sur motions to produce documents and to strike out affirmative defenses of answer.
1Opinion of the Court
Sur Motion to Produce.
DICKINSON, District Judge.
[1] It would not infrequently be of great convenience, and often of great advantage, to a defendant to have the plaintiff’s proofs submitted for inspection in advance of *323trial. A plaintiff might be required to so submit them. Even-handed justice would, however, demand that the defense be, in like manner, required to show its hand. The principle would follow the anticipated course of the trial through all its stages, rebuttal and surrebuttal. Whatever merits such a practice might in its broad statement present, it is clear the securement of these…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Atlantic Refining Co. v. Port Lobos Petroleum Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1922
- Dixie Drinking Cup Co. v. Paper Utilities Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1925
- United States v. One Quart Bottle of Alleged WhiskyDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1928
- Murray v. Magnolia Petroleum Co.District Court, N.D. Texas · 1927