Legal Opinion

Weel v. United States

District Court, E.D. New York

Decided October 4, 1946No. 17834PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MOSCOWITZ, District Judge.

Two companion applications by libelant seek to have vacated respondent’s notices of taking depositions de bene esse of witnesses in Tennessee and California in an admiralty suit brought in this district and about to be reached for trial, or, in the alternative, that the taking of the depositions be permitted only upon the condition that the respondent pay the expenses of libelant’s proctor, together with a reasonable counsel fee, for attendance at the examinations. The applications were brought on by orders to show cause which stayed the taking of the depositions…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. OregonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1904
  2. Pero v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1945
  3. Pacific Mail S. S. Co. v. IversonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1907
  4. The Fair OaksDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1913
  5. Daniel F. Young, Inc. v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1944

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Molinos v. The Rio GrandeDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 1955
  2. Standard Steamship Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1954
  3. Helgesen v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1966

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API