Legal Opinion
Corrigan v. Methodist Hospital
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 11, 1995No. Civ. A. No. 94-CV-1478PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
JOYNER, District Judge.
Defendant Myers has moved this Court to try Corrigan’s negligent credentialling claim against Methodist in a trial separate1 from her other claims. Defendant Davne has filed a joinder to this motion pursuant to Rule 26(b). That rule governs protective orders in the context of discovery, which has no applicability here. Nonetheless, we will treat his joinder as a motion requesting a separate trial for him as well as for Myers.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(b) states that a “court, in furtherance of convenience or to avoid prejudice, or when separate trials…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. Amy Ralston Pofahl, Charles T. Nunn, and Randy WhiteCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993
- United States v. Roberto Gonzalez, Roberto Ramirez, Angel M. Amejeiras, Vicente Chao, Luis Gonzalez, and Rafael IzquierdoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1991
- Willemijn Houdstermaatschaapij BV v. Apollo Computer Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1989
- Laitram Corp. v. Hewlett-Packard Co.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1992
- Wetherill v. University of ChicagoDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- A-Plus Janitorial & Carpet Cleaning v. the Employers' Workers' Compensation Ass'nSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1997
- Real v. Bunn-O-Matic Corp.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2000
- Graudins v. Retro Fitness, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2013
- BD v. DeBuonoDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2000
- Pennington v. Harvest Foods, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1996
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.