Legal Opinion
Canister Co. v. National Can Corp.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided November 30, 1948No. Civ. A. Nos. 309, 365PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LEAHY, Chief Judge.
1. Defendant moves for production of certain writings averring that they have relevance to the remaining issue of damages suffered by plaintiffs.1 It appears defendant has satisfied the requirements of Rule 34, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. Good cause for production has been shown. The writings may contain facts whereby defendant may be able to minimize the amount of plaintiffs’ alleged damages. Clearly plaintiffs will not voluntarily allow production and inspection. I shall not discuss each of the items but each has some relevance. However, the admonition…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Canister Co. v. National Can CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1947
- Canister Co. v. National Can Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1945
- Canister Co. v. National Can Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1946
- Canister Co. v. National Can Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1943
- Canister Co. v. National Can Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1946
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Canister Co. v. Leahy, Chief JudgeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1950
- Kalmanovitz v. G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1985
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Radio Corp. of AmericaDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1952
- Reeves v. Pennsylvania R.District Court, D. Delaware · 1949
- New Hampshire Fire Insurance v. PerkinsDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1961
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.