Legal Opinion
Hull v. United States Rubber Co.
District Court, E.D. Michigan
Decided December 19, 1945No. 5096PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PICARD, District Judge.
The question in this case turns on the scope of Rule 14 and the limitations prescribed by Rule No. 82, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, on which many interpretations have been made, but generally with a fact situation different from the one at bar.
Here plaintiff brings action in tort against defendant who in turn denies any negligence but adopts plaintiff’s claims of negligence by charging them against third party defendant brought into this case on defendant’s motion.
The matter is before this court on motion to vacate such order,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Brown v. CranstonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1942
- Morrell v. United Air Lines Transport CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1939
- Malkin v. Arundel CorporationDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1941
- Gray v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.District Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1940
- Hoskie v. Prudential Ins. Co. of AmericaDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1941
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Allen & Whalen, Inc. v. John C. Grimberg Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1962
- White v. Land Homes CorporationCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1968
- United States v. De HavenDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 1953
- Northeast Clackamas County Electric Co-Operative, Inc. v. Continental Casualty Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955
- Northeast Clackamas County Electric Co-Operative, Inc., a Corporation v. Continental Casualty Company, a Corporation, and S. H. Ripp, Doing Business as Ripp Electric Company, S. H. Ripp, Doing Business as Ripp Electric Company v. Northeast Clackamas County Electric Cooperative, Inc., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955