Vecchia v. Fairchild Engine & Airplane Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
FRANK, Circuit Judge.
We shall assume, arguendo, the propriety, under Rule 12(e) as it then stood, of the requirements of the second provision of the order of June 23, 1947.1 We shall also similarly assume that the district court, by its order of November 12, 1947, properly denied plaintiffs’ motion for examination before trial. Even so, that order modified the earlier order with the result that plaintiffs were not required to supply the information if not within their knowledge. The proposed amended complaint attached to the notice of motion of December 30, 1947, stated in effect that…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Battaglia v. General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
- Galdi v. JonesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- Barrett v. National Malleable & Steel Castings Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1946
- Walling v. Bay State Dredging & Contracting Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1942
- Walling v. StaffenDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1946
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- James D. Hodgson, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. Virginia Baptist Hospital, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1973
- Goodman v. CushmanArizona Supreme Court · 1962
- Cmax, Inc. v. HallCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1961
- Sachs v. Montague Shoe Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1954
- Petition of Cmax, Inc. v. HallCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1961
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.