Legal Opinion
Momand v. Universal Film Exchange, Inc.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided March 20, 1942No. 7024PublishedCited by 62 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WYZANSKI, District Judge.
At an earlier stage of this case Judge McLellan ordered that the issue of the statute of limitations should be tried separately and before a trial on the merits. Momand v. Paramount Pictures Distributing Co., D.C., 36 F.Supp. 568, 571. Pursuant to- that order, the parties have filed an agreed statement of facts. My findings and conclusions are directed solely to the issue of the statute of limitations and in no way touch upon the merits.
Findings of Fact.
1. Introductory. In these findings of fact I consider in turn: the date this case began (fdg. 2); a summary…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- United States v. Borden Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Baltimore Steamship Co. v. PhillipsSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Chattanooga Foundry & Pipe Works v. City of AtlantaSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- United States v. MoserSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by62 opinions
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
- The Flintkote Company, a Corporation v. Elmer Lysfjord and Walter R. Waldron, Doing Business as Aabeta Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
- Suckow Borax Mines Consolidated, Inc. v. Borax Consolidated, LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1950
- Williamson v. Columbia Gas & Electric Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1950
- Momand v. Universal Film Exchanges, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1948
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.