Legal Opinion

Gebhard v. Isbrandtsen Co.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided March 31, 1950PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McGOHEY, District Judge.

This is a suit under the Jones Act for damages for personal injuries and for maintenance and cure.

Plaintiff, pursuant to Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. propounded twenty-four interrogatories to the defendant. Objections were made to nine, of which seven were disposed of on argument, leaving for consideration only two which relate to interrogatories Nos. 4 and 7. These demand “verbatim contents” or if in writing a true copy of “any statements or reports made to defendant by any of defendant’s agents, servants and employees with regard…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Alltmont v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1950
  3. Reeves v. Pennsylvania R.District Court, D. Delaware · 1949
  4. Newell v. Capital Transit Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1948

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Durkin v. Pet Milk Co.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1953
  2. State Farm Insurance Company v. RobertsArizona Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Holt v. The James SheridanDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1951
  4. Pickett v. L. R. Ryan, Inc.District Court, E.D. South Carolina · 1965
  5. McManus v. HarknessDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1951

3 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