Legal Opinion
Rosseau v. Langley
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided July 7, 1945No. Civ. No. 22-205PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GODDARD, District Judge.
This is a motion by the plaintiffs for the production and inspection of documents pursuant to Rule 34 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. It relates to a stockholders derivative action brought in behalf of the Iowa Southern Utilities Company of Delaware against its officers, directors and others. Defendants, Langley and deRivera, oppose the motion on the grounds that many of the documents called for are irrelevant and immaterial because (1) the statute of limitations of the State of New York has run against many of the transactions…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Connecticut Importing Co. v. Continental Distilling Corp.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1940
- Lewis v. United Air Lines Transport CorporationDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1939
- Bruun v. HansonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1939
- United States v. Aluminum Co. of AmericaDistrict Court, D. New York · 1939
- Bruun v. HansonDistrict Court, D. Idaho · 1939
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Boeing Airplane Company v. Thomas Coggeshall, Chairman, the Renegotiation Board, Thomas Coggeshall, Chairman, the Renegotiation Board v. Boeing Airplane Company, Boeing Airplane Company, Cross-Appellant v. Thomas Coggeshall, Chairman, the Renegotiation Board, Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1960
- Boeing Airplane Co. v. CoggeshallCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1960
- Wild v. PaysonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1946
- Enger-Kress Co. v. Amity Leather Products Co.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1955
- Lundberg v. WellesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1951
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.