Chandler Bldg. Corp. v. Shannon

District of Columbia

Chandler Bldg. Corp. v. Shannon

1 F.R.D. 105, 1 Fed. R. Serv. 511, 1939 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1652

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia

DecidedMarch 27, 1939

DocketNo. 55474

StatusPublished

This text of 1 F.R.D. 105 (Chandler Bldg. Corp. v. Shannon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chandler Bldg. Corp. v. Shannon, 1 F.R.D. 105, 1 Fed. R. Serv. 511, 1939 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1652 (D.D.C. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

LUHRING, Associate Justice.

The motion of the plaintiff, Chandler Building Corporation, to dismiss bill of complaint is overruled.

The bill of complaint was filed in this court March 22d, 1933. Answers were filed and such proceeding's were had as that receivers were appointed to take charge of and manage the property pendente lite. These receivers have had charge of this property ever since their appointment and are now in charge of the same.

The motion to dismiss was made at the same time a petition for intervention was presented to the court.

The plaintiff is not entitled to dismiss as a matter of right. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, 41 (a), paragraph (2), 28 U.S.C. A. following section 723c, controls, and under the circumstances here disclosed the court is overruling the motion to dismiss and at the same time allowing the filing of the petition in intervention.

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

LUHRING, Associate Justice.

The motion of the plaintiff, Chandler Building Corporation, to dismiss bill of complaint is overruled.

The bill of complaint was filed in this court March 22d, 1933. Answers were filed and such proceeding's were had as that receivers were appointed to take charge of and manage the property pendente lite. These receivers have had charge of this property ever since their appointment and are now in charge of the same.

The motion to dismiss was made at the same time a petition for intervention was presented to the court.

The plaintiff is not entitled to dismiss as a matter of right. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, 41 (a), paragraph (2), 28 U.S.C. A. following section 723c, controls, and under the circumstances here disclosed the court is overruling the motion to dismiss and at the same time allowing the filing of the petition in intervention.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 F.R.D. 105, 1 Fed. R. Serv. 511, 1939 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chandler-bldg-corp-v-shannon-dcd-1939.