Viront v. Wheeling & Lake Erie Ry. Co.
District Court, N.D. Ohio
1Opinion of the Court
JONES, Chief Judge.
In these two cases plaintiffs move the court for an order under Rule 34, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., requiring defendant to permit the plaintiffs to inspect and copy the following documents :
1. Statements of the plaintiff, whether signed or unsigned.
2. Statement of the employee witnesses and of all employees of the defendant from whom statements were taken by the defendant relative to the accident and injuries sustained by the plaintiff, etc.
The motions further state: “The defendant has the possession, custody and control of each of the foregoing…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Hayman v. Pullman Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1948
- Reeves v. Pennsylvania R.District Court, D. Delaware · 1949
- Mulligan v. Eastern S. S. Lines, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1946
- Dalzell v. Valvoline Oil Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1934
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- The Duplan Corporation v. Moulinage Et Retorderie De Chavanoz, Deering Milliken, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1973
- Mitchell v. BassCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1958
- Scourtes v. Fred W. Albrecht Grocery Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1953
- Sharon Steel Corp. v. Travelers Indemnity Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1960
- Bowdle v. Automobile Ins.District Court, D. Delaware · 1950
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.