Legal Opinion

Munzer v. Swedish American Line

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided September 13, 1940PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LEIBELL, District Judge.

This is a motion by the plaintiff to vacate and set aside subpoenas duces tecum, and the order‘for their issuance, made under Rule 45 (d) (1), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, and the notices, Rule 30(a), F.R.C.P., to plaintiff’s attorneys that the Superintendents of Rockland State Hospital and of Stamford Hall, and all of the records of said hospitals, would be examined on discovery at a certain time and place. The records subpoenaed and the examination sought relate to plaintiff’s treatment as a patient in those institutions.…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Sinclair Refining Co. v. Jenkins Petroleum Process Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
  2. Steinberg v. New York Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1933
  3. Apter v. Home Life Insurance CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1935
  4. Morris v. New York, Ontario & Western Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1895
  5. Capron v. . DouglassNew York Court of Appeals · 1908

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Baird v. KoernerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
  2. Judy Garland v. Marie TorreCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1958
  3. Dallas County v. Commercial Union Assurance Company, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1961
  4. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Thomas E. BreiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962
  5. Van Wie v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1948

31 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