Hartford v. Cleveland Automobile Co.
District Court, D. Delaware
In Equity. Suit by Edward B. Hartford against the Cleveland Automobile Company. On objections by defendant to interrogatories.
1Opinion of the Court
MORRIS, District Judge.
The defendant has presented objections to plaintiff’s interrogatories 3, 4, 5, 6, the second portion of 6a, 9, 10, and 11. I find nothing to distinguish the third interrogatory from the interrogatories considered by the District Court for the District of New Jersey in the case of General Electric Co. v. Independent Lamp & Wire Co., 244 Fed. 825. For the sake of uniformity in this circuit I am inclined to follow the rule of that case unless and until a different *591rule is esiablislied by the Circuit Court of Appeals. The objection to this interrogatory will therefore be…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Luten v. CampDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1915
- General Electric Co. v. Independent Lamp & Wire Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1915
3Cited by4 opinions
- Universal Oil Products Co. v. Skelly Oil Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1926
- Paraffine Cos., Inc. v. WielandDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1927
- Dixie Drinking Cup Co. v. Paper Utilities Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1925
- Pratt v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1938