MacLeod & Co. v. United States
District Court, W.D. Washington
1Opinion of the Court
NETERER, District Judge.
Interrogatories calling for evidence must be confined to testimony necessary to the proof of the libelant's case (Prince Line, Ltd., v. Mayer & Lage, Inc. [D. C.] 264 Fed. 856), and may not be used merely to fish into the evidence which the interrogated party may produce in support of its own allegations (The Princess Sophia [D. C.] 269 Fed. 651). See also The Hewitt (D. C.) 284 Fed. 911, American Maritime Cases (1923) 89.
The exceptions must be sustained, except to the supplemental interrogatory as to the longitude and latitude in which the storm occurred.
2Cases cited3 opinions
- The S. S. HewittDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1922
- Prince Line, Ltd. v. Mayer & Lage, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1920
- The Princess SophiaDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1920
3Cited by4 opinions
- In re Navigazione Libera TriestinaDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1929
- Curtis v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1939
- Malgor v. Royal InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1924
- The FavoritaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1929