Legal Opinion
Carbola Chemical Co. v. Trundle
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided February 15, 1943PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LEIBELL, District Judge.
On December 26, 1942, I filed an opinion granting a motion of the corporate defendant, the Trundle Engineering Co., for leave to bring in the Wellman Engineering Co. as a third-party defendant, under Rule 14(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, 3 F.R.D. 500.- An order to that effect was entered December 30, 1942. Thereafter a third-party summons and complaint were served upon the Wellman Engineering Co. which now moves to vacate the order of December 30, 1942, or in the alternative for an order dismissing the third-party complaint…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Fox v. Western New York Motor Lines, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Brown v. CranstonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1942
- Malkin v. Arundel CorporationDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1941
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- García Molina v. Gobierno de la CapitalSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1949
- O'Neill v. American Export Lines, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1946
- García Molina v. Government of the CapitalSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1949