Legal Opinion

Meixsell v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided September 23, 1960No. Civ. A. No. 25245Published

1Opinion of the Court

KRAFT, District Judge.

Plaintiffs’ supplemental interrogatories 1 to 11, inclusive, 13 and 14 are filed under F.R.Civ.P. 33, 28 U.S.C.A. Defendant’s basic objection to these interrogatories is that they are clearly requests for admission under F.R.Civ.P. 36. While plaintiff argues that the Court should always look to realities, we cannot ignore the differentiation between the two rules involved, the purposes and functions of which are separate and distinct. Jones v. Boyd Truck Lines, D.C., 11 F.R.D. 67.

Whether these supplemental interrogatories are phrased as ■ they are *153through design or…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Jones v. Boyd Truck Lines, Inc.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1951
  2. United States v. New Wrinkle, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1954

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

Powered by the Exa API