Legal Opinion
Weinstein v. Ehrenhaus
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 14, 1988No. 84 Civ. 5641PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LEVAL, District Judge.
Defendants move for an Order pursuant to Rules 37(b) and 37(d) F.R.Civ.P. dismissing the complaint for plaintiff’s failure to comply with discovery orders and failure to appear at his own deposition. The motion is granted.
BACKGROUND
The complaint alleges that the defendants Jack Ehrenhaus and Stanley Mesnick admitted plaintiff Barry Weinstein into membership in a real estate partnership doing business under the name Ehrenhaus Associates, that as a partner he was entitled to a participation in the profits of the partnership, that during the four months in which he was a…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Societe Internationale Pour Participations Industrielles Et Commerciales, S. A. v. RogersSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Cine Forty-Second Street Theatre Corp. v. Allied Artists Pictures Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1979
- Teresa Alvarez, Cross-Appellee v. Simmons Market Research Bureau, Inc. And Jwt Group, Inc., Cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1988
- Nittolo v. BrandDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1983
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Mill-Run Tours, Inc. v. KhashoggiDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1989
- Vargas v. PeltzDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 1995
- Weinstein v. EhrenhausCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1988
- Weinstein v. EhrenhausCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989