Fredricksen v. Bethlehem Steel Co.

BRUCHHAUSEN, District Judge.

By this motion, the plaintiff seeks an order directing the defendant to answer interrogatories and to produce documents.

In his letter memorandum of March 11, 1955, plaintiff’s counsel seems to make the point that since defendant defaulted in complying with the interrogatories, or in objecting to them, it waived its rights. While this may be technically correct, the general rule in the State courts appears to be that the party seeking discovery, or examinations, must show the propriety thereof. Even the case of Cary v. Hardy, D.C., 1 F.R.D. 355, cited by plaintiff…