Legal Opinion
Santiago v. American Export Lines, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided May 28, 1962PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
METZNER, District Judge.
This is a motion by defendant pursuant "to Rule 30 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., to vacate a notice to examine the defendant by its ■chief engineer.
Plaintiff, a seaman, has instituted an :action to recover damages for illness .allegedly sustained on board defendant’s vessel. He claims that the air conditioner in his room was broken and faulty, and that the thermostat was broken, all ■of which aggravated his condition because he was confined to his room instead of being transferred to the ship’s 'hospital. He contends that he should be permitted…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Rubin v. General Tire & Rubber Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1955
- Naylor v. Isthmian S. S. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1951
- Fay v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1958
- Klop v. United Fruit Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1955
- Aston v. American Export Lines, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1951
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- United States v. Afram Lines (USA), Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 1994
- Alexander McDonald Libelant-Appellant v. United States of America, and Bethlehem Steel Company, ImpleadedCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1963
- Atlantic Coast Insulating Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1964
- Hughes Bros. v. Callanan Road Improvement Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1967