Grimmett v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co.
District Court, N.D. Ohio
1Opinion of the Court
FREED, District Judge.
Defendant’s Interrogatory No. 1 asked plaintiff to list his income for each month during the year 1949. In answer thereto, and without objecting to the question, the plaintiff replied that he had testified to these matters at a deposition hearing and referred defendant to the deposition record in defendant’s possession. Defendant now moves 'for an order compelling plaintiff to answer the interrogatory.
The answer given is unsatisfactory. Plaintiff will be required to answer fully under oath to the best of his knowledge, Rule 33, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Ketchikan Cold Storage Company v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1971
- Ferrara v. Balistreri & DiMaio, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1985
- Seiden v. AllenNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1975
- Hastings v. ThurstonArizona Supreme Court · 1966
- Willys Motors, Inc. v. Northwest Kaiser-Willys, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1956
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.