Legal Opinion
Hurt v. Coyne Cylinder Co.
District Court, W.D. Tennessee
Decided February 15, 1989No. 87-2004-TUAPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS’- SECOND REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS
TURNER, District Judge.
The defendant Coyne Cylinder Company has filed a motion to strike the Plaintiffs’ Second Request for Admissions which was filed on January 5, 1989. Defendant contends that the request was not filed timely since it was filed only 15 days prior to January 20,1989, which is the date imposed by the United States Magistrate in the modified Rule 16(b) scheduling order for the conclusion of all discovery. Defendant *615contends that since Rule 36 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows them thirty (30) days…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Misco, Inc., Mid-South Aluminum Company, and Everett W. Fielder, Jr. v. United States Steel Corporation and Alside, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1986
3Cited by7 opinions
- Meadows v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2001
- O'Neill v. MedadDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1996
- Gluck v. Ansett Australia Ltd.District Court, District of Columbia · 2001
- Jarvis v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.District Court, N.D. Mississippi · 1995
- Aspen Petroleum Products, Inc. v. ZedanColorado Court of Appeals · 2005
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.