Audiffren Refrigerating Mach. Co. v. General Electric Co.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Two actions, one at law and the other in equity, by the Audiffren Refrigerating Machine Company against the General Electric Company. On motion by defendant to vacate notices of the taking of depositions de bene esse under section 863 of the Revised Statutes.
1Opinion of the Court
HAIGHT, District Judge.
The plaintiff has instituted two actions against the defendant, one at law and the other in equity. Both are at issue. Its attorneys have given notices to the defendant that they propose, at a time and place in the notices set forth, to take, for use in each action, the testimony of certain witnesses by deposition de bene esse, under section 863 of the Revised Statutes (U. S- Comp. Stat. 1916, § 1472). The defendant moves to vacate the notices.
[1] 1. It is urged, primarily, in opposition to the motions, that the court is without power to vacate the notices in advance of…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Cornett v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Henning v. BoyleU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1901
- Flower v. MacGinnissCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1901
- Phettiplace v. SaylesU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1826
- Iowa Washing Mach. Co. v. Montgomery Ward & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1915
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co. v. Bates Expanded Steel Truss Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1924
- Balip Automotive Repairs, Inc. v. SchroederNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1949
- Juster v. GrossmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
- Price & Pierce, Ltd. v. Gilson Bros.District Court, E.D. New York · 1932
- Meyers v. Occidental Oil Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1922