Legal Opinion

Welty v. Clute

District Court, W.D. New York

Decided August 20, 1940No. Civ. No. 44PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KNIGHT, District Judge.

Two motions are presented for decision: One to take the deposition of the plaintiff; the other for discovery.

Upon plaintiff’s application, his deposition was taken for the purpose of perpetuating his testimony. The plaintiff was examined and cross-examined at length. I have carefully read and re-read this deposition. While many of the answers of the plaintiff upon the cross-examination are not responsive to questions put, it seems to me that the deposition in its entirety answers all that is material in the examination now proposed and that a further examination is not…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. English v. CowellDistrict Court, C.D. Illinois · 1986
  2. Perry v. Kelly-Springfield Tire Co.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 1987
  3. Tramm v. Porter Memorial HospitalDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1989
  4. Jones v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API