Legal Opinion

Frank v. Kempczynski

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided July 1, 1952No. 9PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Layton, J.:

Plaintiff was served with notice by defendant to appear for the taking of her deposition prior to trial. She did not appear. Her attorney stated on the record that he had advised her to appear but she had refused stating that she would appear but *252once, on the day of trial when she would testify. Defendant has moved for a judgment by default in accordance with Rule 37 (a) of the Superior Court which is the same as the Federal Rule 37(d), 28 U.S. C.A.

The provisions of this rule do not seem to have been construed by the Federal Courts as mandatory. Moore’s Federal Practice, Vol. 4 §…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Dann v. Compagnie Generale Trans-Atlantique Ltd.District Court, E.D. New York · 1939
  2. Madison v. CobbDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1939

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hohlstein v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API