Legal Opinion
Broidy v. State Mut. Life Assur. Co.
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided May 10, 1950No. Civ. No. 10406PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GALSTON, District Judge.
This is a motion made by the defendant, State Mutual Life Assurance Company, under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the grounds that plaintiff is not the proper party to bring the action, and that plaintiff has failed to join an indispensable party; or, in the alternative, for an order, pur- ’ suant to Rule 19(b), to stay further proceedings in this action until such time as the plaintiff joins a necessary party.
The complaint sets forth a cause of action seeking reformation of a life…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Shields v. BarrowSupreme Court of the United States · 1855
- Seaver v. . RansomNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Hauselt v. . PattersonNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Greenleaf v. Safeway Trails, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- In Re the Appraisal, Under the Transfer Tax Law, of the Estate of LyonNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Broidy v. State Mut. Life Assur. Co. Of Worcester, Mass.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1951
- United States v. DavioDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1955