Brown v. Dubuque Fire & Marine Ins.

W.D. Missouri

Brown v. Dubuque Fire & Marine Ins.

11 F.R.D. 81, 1950 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3539

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri

DecidedDecember 28, 1950

DocketNo. 6682

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 11 F.R.D. 81 (Brown v. Dubuque Fire & Marine Ins.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brown v. Dubuque Fire & Marine Ins., 11 F.R.D. 81, 1950 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3539 (W.D. Mo. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

REEVES, Chief Judge.

This motion is based upon the fact that prior to the filing of the instant suit the defendant had heretofore, to-wit, on December 30, 1949, filed a suit for a declaratory judgment against the plaintiffs. This suit is numbered 6135 and is pending in this court. The defendant in this action seeks delay of adjudication until the questions raised in the declaratory judgment suit have been determined.

Attention is called to Rule 13(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., which requires a counterclaim under certain contingencies, and it is argued by counsel for the defendant that a counterclaim in case 6135 would have the identical effect as this independent suit. It is unnecessary either to dismiss or delay this action. All of the questions can be resolved by consolidating this action with case numbered 6135.

Accordingly, the two actions, No. 6682 and No. 6135, will be consolidated so that all of the questions can be • determined in one proceeding.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

REEVES, Chief Judge.

This motion is based upon the fact that prior to the filing of the instant suit the defendant had heretofore, to-wit, on December 30, 1949, filed a suit for a declaratory judgment against the plaintiffs. This suit is numbered 6135 and is pending in this court. The defendant in this action seeks delay of adjudication until the questions raised in the declaratory judgment suit have been determined.

Attention is called to Rule 13(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., which requires a counterclaim under certain contingencies, and it is argued by counsel for the defendant that a counterclaim in case 6135 would have the identical effect as this independent suit. It is unnecessary either to dismiss or delay this action. All of the questions can be resolved by consolidating this action with case numbered 6135.

Accordingly, the two actions, No. 6682 and No. 6135, will be consolidated so that all of the questions can be • determined in one proceeding.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 F.R.D. 81, 1950 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3539, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-dubuque-fire-marine-ins-mowd-1950.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack