Schram v. Holmes
District Court, E.D. Michigan
1Opinion of the Court
PICARD, District Judge.
The only question involved in this case is this : May a Federal court use its discretion in determining whether or not service of summons nine months after the bill of complaint was filed is valid?
Plaintiff brings suit here on a bank assessment. Complaint was filed May 2, 1939, and the statute of limitations would have barred the action three months later or on *120July 31st. Service of process was made on defendant, Williams, January 29, 1940, almost nine months after filing the bill of complaint and six months after the statute of limitations had elapsed. Defendant lived…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Carnegie Nat. Bank v. City of Wolf PointCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1940
- Swift & Co. v. YoungCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1939
- Gallagher v. CarrollDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1939
- Home Savings Bank v. YoungMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Davis-Wilson v. Hilton Hotels Corp.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1985
- Murphey v. ValenzuelaArizona Supreme Court · 1963
- Elizabethtown Trust Company v. KonschakDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1967
- H. Alpers & Associates v. Omega Precision Hand Tools, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1974
- Hukill v. Pacific and Arctic Railway & Navigation Co.District Court, D. Alaska · 1958
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.