Legal Opinion

Sandonato v. Carborundum Co.

District Court, W.D. New York

Decided November 6, 1936No. 1862-APublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RIPPEY, District Judge.

There are two motions before the court. The first motion was made by the plaintiff for leave to amend his complaint to show, in substance, that no injurious exposure occurred since September 1, 1935, and the second motion was made by the defendant to dismiss the complaint as to the first and third causes of action.

As to plaintiff’s motion to amend, the papers that there presented upon the argument were insufficient to warrant the granting of the motion, and the court stated that it would grant leave to the plaintiff to present an affidavit by plaintiff to supply the…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Mapes v. Massey-Harris Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 1937
  2. Ligiecki v. E. I. Dupont DeNemours & Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 1942

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

Powered by the Exa API