Legal Opinion
Lawrence v. Fuld
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided March 15, 1963No. Civ. No. 11194PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WINTER, District Judge.
Defendants have moved for an order, either under Rule 41(a)(2), F.R.Civ.P., or under the general equity power of the Court, to allow them costs (excluding court costs which have been taxed to plaintiff, but including counsel fees), upon plaintiff’s dismissal of the instant proceedings, with prejudice.
The litigation began February 24,1959, upon the filing of a complaint against defendant Fuld, which contained four counts—the first based upon the federal antitrust laws for triple damages, together with costs, expenses and attorneys’ fees, the second and third for unfair…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Sprague v. Ticonic National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- ROLAX Et Al. v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. CO. Et Al.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1951
- Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Guardian Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Guardian Trust Co. v. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
- Esquire, Inc. v. Varga Enterprises, Inc. (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1950
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Colombrito v. KellyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
- Dan Smoot v. Honorable Noel P. Fox, United States District Judge for the Western Districtof MichiganCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1965
- Colombrito v. KellyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
- Gerald Carroll v. E One IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018
- Harris v. MarshDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1987
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.