Legal Opinion

Kurt M. Jachmann Co. v. Hartley, Cooper & Co.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided October 8, 1954PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DAWSON, District Judge.

This is a motion to vacate plaintiff’s notices to take the depositions of certain defendants. It is undisputed that these defendants are British subjects residing in England, and that their places of business are in England. The notices of examination would require them to appear for oral examination at the United States Courthouse in New York City. The proper place for taking the oral deposition of individual defendants is their residence, or of corporate defendants, their principal place of business. I think the plaintiff’s purpose would be adequately served at this…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Isbrandsten v. MollerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1947

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Fischer & Porter Co. v. Sheffield Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1962
  2. Ciunci, Inc. v. LoganSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1995
  3. Deep South Oil Co. of Texas v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1958
  4. Trehan v. Von TarkanyiDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1986
  5. Buryan v. Max Factor & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1967

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API