Clifton S. S. Corp. v. United States

S.D. New York

Clifton S. S. Corp. v. United States

107 F. Supp. 396, 1952 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3810

DecidedSeptember 12, 1952

StatusPublished

This text of 107 F. Supp. 396 (Clifton S. S. Corp. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Clifton S. S. Corp. v. United States, 107 F. Supp. 396, 1952 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3810 (S.D.N.Y. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

WEINFELD, District Judge.

In the exercise of discretion, the motion for a transfer is granted. 46 U.S.C.A. § 742. The cause of action arose in Oregon; all 'of respondent’s trial witnesses reside there and many records .which the Government plans to introduce into evidence are located there. The statement that most, if not all, of the libelant’s witnesses reside in the vicinity of Portland, Oregon, is not directly denied. Furthermore, there is no claim by libelant that any of its witnesses are residents in this district or available here to testify upon the trial. These factors •outweigh the consideration that .libelant’s home office is located in this district. Upon the facts the interests of both litigants would .appear best served by a transfer. Ortiz v. Union Oil Co. of California, D.C., 102 F.Supp. 492.

Settle order on notice.

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

WEINFELD, District Judge.

In the exercise of discretion, the motion for a transfer is granted. 46 U.S.C.A. § 742. The cause of action arose in Oregon; all 'of respondent’s trial witnesses reside there and many records .which the Government plans to introduce into evidence are located there. The statement that most, if not all, of the libelant’s witnesses reside in the vicinity of Portland, Oregon, is not directly denied. Furthermore, there is no claim by libelant that any of its witnesses are residents in this district or available here to testify upon the trial. These factors •outweigh the consideration that .libelant’s home office is located in this district. Upon the facts the interests of both litigants would .appear best served by a transfer. Ortiz v. Union Oil Co. of California, D.C., 102 F.Supp. 492.

Settle order on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

107 F. Supp. 396, 1952 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3810, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clifton-s-s-corp-v-united-states-nysd-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack