Legal Opinion

Kelly v. Harris

District Court, D. Montana

Decided January 20, 1958No. Civ. A. No. 1875PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JAMESON, District Judge.

On July 24, 1957, plaintiff filed a request for admission of facts, directed to “Frisbee & Moore, Attorneys for Defendant”, Cut Bank, Montana. On June 20, 1957, defendant had filed a praecipe for the entry of Doyle and Francisco of Conrad, Montana as attorneys for the defendant, reciting that Frisbee & Moore bad withdrawn and were no longer attorneys for the defendant. On August ■9, 1957, Doyle & Francisco, as attorneys -.for the defendant, filed answers to plaintiff’s request, six days after the ten days ■prescribed for answer by Rule 36 of the Federal Rules of Civil…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Southern Pacific Railroad v. WillettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Mars v. McDougalCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1930
  3. Countee v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1940
  4. Eberle v. Sinclair Prairie Oil Co.District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · 1940
  5. State Ex Rel. Meyer v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1936

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Robert Allen French v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969
  2. Moses v. MosesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1973
  3. Wheeler v. Carlson TransportMontana Supreme Court · 1985
  4. England v. Dana Corp.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1970
  5. State ex rel. Craig v. District Court of the Thirteenth Judicial DistrictMontana Supreme Court · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API