Legal Opinion
J. H. Day Co. v. Mountain City Mill Co.
District Court, E.D. Tennessee
Decided July 23, 1915No. 10PublishedCited by 24 opinions
In Equity. Bill by the J. H. Day Company against the Mountain City Mill Company and others, for alleged infringement. of patent. Written interrogatories filed by defendants after answer, for discovery by plaintiff. On objections thereto filed by plaintiff.
1Opinion of the Court
SANFORD, District Judge.
The 58th Equity Rule, promulgated by the Supreme Court in 1912 (198 Fed. xxxiv, 115 C. C. A. xxxiv) provides that:
“The plaintiff at any time after filing the bill and not later than twenty-one days after the joinder of issue, and the defendant at any time after filing his answer and not later than twenty-one days after the joinder of issue, and either party at any tinae thereafter by leave of the court or judge, may file interrogatories in writing for the discovery by the opposite party or parties of facts and documents material to the support or defense of the cause.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Kelley v. BoettcherCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1898
- Luten v. CampDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1915
- Bronk v. Charles H. Scott Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1914
- P. M. Co. v. Ajax Rail Anchor Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1914
- Blast Furnace Appliances Co. v. Worth Bros.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1915
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- F. Speidel Co. v. N. Barstow Co.District Court, D. Rhode Island · 1916
- Wolcott v. National Electric Signaling Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1916
- Kinney v. RiceDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1916
- Terry v. StullCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1933
- Batdorf v. Sattley Coin Handling Mach. Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1916
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.