Baker v. Waterman S. S. Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
WEINFELD, District Judge.
While both actions, arising out of an explosion, involve common questions of law and fact, the Court cannot say that a consolidation under Rule 42 of the .Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., may not be prejudicial to the defendants.
The nature and extent of the injuries sustained by the plaintiff in each separate action and the period of disability are different. No matter how carefully a jury were instructed as to separate consideration of the damages of each plaintiff, there is a chance that the jury after listening to evidence as to pain, suffering and injury of…
2Cited by24 opinions
- In Re Bendectin Litigation.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988
- Bennett v. WarnerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1988
- Malcolm v. National Gypsum Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- Ismail v. CohenDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1989
- Moss v. Associated Transport, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1965
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.