Frankel v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
District Court, E.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
BYERS, District Judge.
This is a patent infringement suit in equity. Plaintiff moves for an order under rule 58 (28 U.S.C.A. following section 723) directing the defendant to answer the plaintiff’s interrogatories, and requiring the defendant to serve and file a verified bill of particulars.
The motion is resisted upon the ground that, because the bill of complaint demands treble damages, answers to interrogatories may not be required, for reasons stated in Healthometer Co. v. Jacobs Bros. Co., Inc., D. C., 12 F.2d 96, decided in this court on March 31, 1926.
That case is an authority in…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Grasselli Chemical Co. v. National Aniline & Chemical Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1920
- Beacon Folding MacH. Co. v. Rotary MacH. Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1927
- Healthometer Co. v. Jacobs Bros.District Court, E.D. New York · 1926
- Koehring Co. v. Foote Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 1927
3Cited by2 opinions
- Activated Sludge v. Sanitary Dist. of ChicagoDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1946
- Oltarsh v. Goodyear Fabrics Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1939