Legal Opinion

Clair v. Philadelphia Storage Battery Co.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided April 19, 1939No. 19928PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DICKINSON, District Judge.

Notice was given by the defendant that it would take the deposition of an absent witness at Douglas, Arizona. The plaintiff excepts to this unless the defendant is put on terms.

Notice was given of the taking of the depositions of several witnesses, but the only one with which we are concerned is the proposed deposition of Walter E. Holland. Notice was given by counsel for defendant on January 13th, 1939, that his deposition would be taken January . 27th, 1939, at Denver, Colorado. This notice must have been recalled because a second notice was given February 18th,…

2Cited by10 opinions

  1. Kilian v. Stackpole Sons, Inc.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1951
  2. Perry v. EdwardsDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1954
  3. Connell v. Biltmore Security Life InsuranceDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1966
  4. Moore v. George A. Hormel & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1942
  5. Moore v. George A. Hormel & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1942

5 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