Legal Opinion

Hammill v. Hyster Co.

District Court, E.D. Wisconsin

Decided May 1, 1967No. 65-C-18PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DECISION ON MOTION FOR PRODUCTION

MYRON L. GORDON, District Judge.

The defendant has objected to portions of-the plaintiff’s motion for production. The parties have agreed that the areas of dispute on this motion involves the following:

1. Discovery relating to changes between the KD Model Earry Erane by which plaintiff was injured and any later model (s) which defendant has manufactured. (Itemsv-7, 8, and 12).

2. Discovery relating to tipping incidents regarding any model Hyste'r Earry Erane (Item 9).

3. Discovery as to any warnings given by defendant when such warnings are premised on…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Columbia & Puget Sound Railroad v. HawthorneSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Heiden v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Needles v. F. W. Woolworth Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1952
  4. Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Glenn L. Martin CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1955

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Fine v. Facet Aerospace Products Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1990
  2. Uitts v. General Motors Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1972
  3. Bowman v. General Motors Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1974
  4. Reddick v. White Consolidated Industries, Inc.District Court, S.D. Georgia · 1969
  5. Gauche v. Ford Motor CompanyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1969

5 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