Legal Opinion
Montecatini Societá Generale v. Humble Oil & Refining Co.
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided December 16, 1966No. Civ. No. 16526PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
THOMSEN, Chief Judge.
This case is before the Court on defendants’ motion to add Enjay Chemical Company, a Delaware corporation (En-*589jay), as a party defendant pursuant to Rule 25(c), F.R.Giv.P., which provides:
“Rule 25. Substitution of Parties
“(c) Transfer of Interest. In case of any transfer of interest, the action may be continued by or against the original party, unless the court upon motion directs the person to whom the interest is transferred to be substituted in the action or joined with the original party. Service of the motion shall be made as provided in subdivision (a) of this rule.”
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hoffman v. BlaskiSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Hazeltine Corp. v. KirkpatrickCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1948
- Etten v. Lovell Mfg. Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1954
3Cited by1 opinion
- Sandstrom v. LarsenHawaii Supreme Court · 1978