Legal Opinion

Victor G. Bloede Co. v. Carter

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided August 1, 1906PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMAS, District Judge.

This is a bill of discovery in aid of an action at law for damages for conspiracy. The defendants refuse to answer any of the interrogatories attached'to the bill uponffhe ground that complainant, by waiving oath to the answers thereto, is not entitled to such answers. The complainant urges that the court should order the defendants to answer such interrogatories and relies upon Slessinger v. Buckingham (C. C.) 17 Fed. 454, Uhlmann v. Arnholt, etc., Co. (C. C.) 41 Fed. 369, and the forty-first equity rule, in the Slessinger Case Judge Sawyer points out, under the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Colgate v. Compagnie Francaise du Telegraphs de Paris a New YorkU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1885
  2. Slessinger v. BuckinghamUnited States Circuit Court · 1883
  3. McFarland v. State Sav. BankU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Montana · 1904
  4. Tillinghast v. ChaceU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1903
  5. Uhlmann v. Arnholt & Schaeffer Brewing Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1890

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Johnson v. MundySupreme Court of Virginia · 1918
  2. Pathe Exchange v. INTERNATIONAL ALLIANCE, ETC.District Court, S.D. New York · 1932
  3. Calahan v. Holland-Cook Mfg. Co.District Court, W.D. Washington · 1912
  4. Pathé Exchange, Inc. v. International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees & Moving Picture Machine Operators of the United States & Canada, Local No. 306District Court, S.D. New York · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API