Legal Opinion

Wittnebel v. Loughman

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided March 26, 1935PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PATTERSON, District Judge.

The suit is in equity by a stockholder of a failed national bank against the receiver to obtain inspection of the books and records of the bank. The receiver’s motion to dismiss the amended bill was denied. Wittnebel v. Loughman (D. C.) 9 F. Supp. 465. The receiver then answered. The present motion is by the plaintiff to strike out the separate defense set forth in the answer as insufficient in law; also, to strike out the balance of the answer as insufficient in law and tendering no issue to be tried.

While the answer contains denials of several portions of the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Wittnebel v. LoughmanDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1935

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Wittnebel v. LoughmanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935
  2. Schrier v. Federal Deposit Ins.District Court, E.D. New York · 1937
  3. Stewart v. Chick-Fil-A, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API