Legal Opinion
Piorkowski v. Socony Vacuum Oil Co.
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Decided October 18, 1940No. 455 CivilPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WATSON, District Judge.
This case is before the Court for determination of a motion for discovery under Rule 34 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c.
At the oral argument, it was agreed by counsel that the motion should be granted as to requests contained in all of the paragraphs with the exception of paragraph five.
Paragraph five reads as follows: “5. That your petitioner has been informed that the defendant has in its possession written statements signed by Stanley Ludcavage, William Mahelts and Stanley Zwehorosky who are alleged to have some knowledge…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- McCarthy v. PalmerDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1939
- Byers Theaters, Inc. v. MurphyDistrict Court, D. West Virginia · 1940
- Creden v. Central R.District Court, E.D. New York · 1940
- Olson v. New York Cent. R.District Court, E.D. New York · 1940
3Cited by8 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1945
- Porter v. Montaldo'sDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1946
- Stark v. American Dredging Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1943
- Mulligan v. Eastern S. S. Lines, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1946
- Rockaway Pix Theatre, Inc. v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1964
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.