Legal Opinion

Monticello Tobacco Co. v. American Tobacco Co.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided January 23, 1952PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WEINFELD, District Judge.

This is a motion under Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S. C.A., to compel an attorney who acted as trial counsel and is now appeal attorney for the plaintiff to answer certain questions propounded to him upon an oral examination in aid of a judgment for costs entered in favor of the defendants. The questions seek to elicit facts relating to, or leading to, discovery of plaintiff’s assets.

Inquiries as to past financial payments made in connection with plaintiff’s lawsuit conceivably could lead to the discovery of assets held by others or under…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of FeinbergNew York Surrogate's Court · 1945
  2. L. Michel Plumbing & Heating Corp. v. Randall Avenue Theatre Corp.City of New York Municipal Court · 1943

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Caisson Corp. v. County West Building Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1974
  2. Magnaleasing, Inc. v. Staten Island MallDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1977
  3. Harris v. IES Associates, Inc.Court of Appeals of Utah · 2003
  4. Fleming v. EtheringtonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1980
  5. Silicon Knights, Inc. v. Epic Games, Inc.District Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2012

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API