Legal Opinion

Alfred Pearson & Co. v. Hayes

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided April 25, 1949No. Civ. No. 45 — 341PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KAUFMAN, District Judge.

Interrogatories are propounded pursuant to Rule 33, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 28 U.S.C.A. Some of the interrogatories require the production of copies of documents. To these plaintiff objects, contending that these documents may be made available only on an application for discovery and inspection pursuant to Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Without attempting to collate all of the cases considering this question, it is apparent that there is irreconcilable conflict among the decisions.1 The only difference between the discovery procedure afforded…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. De Bruce v. Pennsylvania R. Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1947
  3. Hayman v. Pullman Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1948
  4. Walling v. ParryDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1947
  5. Love v. Metropolitan Life Ins.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1948

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Sierra Berdecía v. Tribunal Superior de Puerto RicoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1959
  2. Alltmont v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1950
  3. Blau v. LambDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1957
  4. Rosado v. Tribunal Superior de Puerto RicoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1967
  5. Baim & Blank, Inc. v. Philco Distributors, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1957

4 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