Legal Opinion
Tytel v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided January 6, 1965PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CROAKE, District Judge.
These are motions for orders, pursuant to Rule 37(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, compelling the defendant to properly answer interrogatories 2, 2(a), 3, 3(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), 5(c),* 6, 9, 10(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and 11 propounded by the plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also request that the reasonable expenses incurred in bringing these motions, including attorneys’ fees, be charged to the defendant.
The actions are to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been .sustained by the plaintiffs as the result of their consumption of. the drug MER/29…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Erone Corp. v. Skouras Theatres Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1958
- Cohen v. Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1955
- Reid v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 1964
3Cited by4 opinions
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 95,647 Irving Sanders v. Leon Levy, Egon Taussig v. Sidney M. Robbins, Michael Shaev and Rita Shaev v. Eric HauserCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
- Bowen v. Whitehall Laboratories, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1966
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 95,647 Irving Sanders v. Leon Levy, Egon Taussig v. Sidney M. Robbins, Michael Shaev and Rita Shaev v. Eric HauserCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
- Wirtz v. MooreDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1966