Fletcher v. Evening Star Newspaper Co.

D.C. Circuit

Fletcher v. Evening Star Newspaper Co.

133 F.2d 395, 77 U.S. App. D.C. 99, 1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 2512

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedDecember 31, 1942

Docket8140

StatusPublished

Cited by40 cases

This text of 133 F.2d 395 (Fletcher v. Evening Star Newspaper Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fletcher v. Evening Star Newspaper Co., 133 F.2d 395, 77 U.S. App. D.C. 99, 1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 2512 (D.C. Cir. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Th*e controlling question raised on this appeal is whether a lower court, on a motion made for summary judgment, and in determining that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, can take judicial notice of its own records in concluding the issue thus raised.

We take this to be too well settled to be seriously questioned. United States v. California Co-op. Canneries, 279 U.S. 553, 49 S.Ct. 423, 73 L.Ed. 838; McDonough v. Owl Drug Company, 9 Cir., 75 F.2d 45, certiorari denied, 295 U.S. 750, 55 S.Ct. 829, 79 L.Ed. 1694; United States v. North American Oil Consolidated, 9 Cir., 264 F. 336, affirming D.C. 1917, 242 F. 723, appeal dismissed 1922, 258 U.S. 633, 42 S.Ct. 315, 66 L.Ed. 802; Freshman v. Atkins, 269 U. S. 121, 46 S.Ct. 41, 70 L.Ed. 193; Booth v. Fletcher, 69 App.D.C. 351, 101 F.2d 676, certiorari denied 307 U.S. 628, 59 S.Ct. 835, 83 L.Ed. 1511; Suren v. Oceanic S. S. Co., 9 Cir., 85 F.2d 324, certiorari denied 300 U.S. 653, 57 S.Ct. 430, 81 L.Ed. 863.

Not only that, but it is settled law that the court may take judicial notice of other cases including the same subject matter or questions of a related nature between the same parties. United States v. North American Oil Consolidated, supra; Sunkist Drinks, Inc., v. Calif. Fruit Growers Exchange, D.C., 25 F.Supp. 400; Freshman v. Atkins, supra; Booth v. Fletcher, supra; *396 Kithcart v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 8 Cir., 88 F.2d 407; National Fire Ins. Co. of Hartford v. Thompson, 281 U.S. 331, 50 S.Ct. 288, 74 L.Ed. 881.

Nor is there anything in the contention that a motion for summary judgment must be accompanied by supporting affidavits. (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 56, U.S.C.A. Tit. 28, following Section 723c.) The Rule does not make such mandatory. Reynolds v. Needle, — U.S.App.D.C. —, 132 F.2d 161, decided Dec. 14, 1942.

There being no reversible error, it follows, therefore, that the judgment of the lower court must be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Th*e controlling question raised on this appeal is whether a lower court, on a motion made for summary judgment, and in determining that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, can take judicial notice of its own records in concluding the issue thus raised.

We take this to be too well settled to be seriously questioned. United States v. California Co-op. Canneries, 279 U.S. 553, 49 S.Ct. 423, 73 L.Ed. 838; McDonough v. Owl Drug Company, 9 Cir., 75 F.2d 45, certiorari denied, 295 U.S. 750, 55 S.Ct. 829, 79 L.Ed. 1694; United States v. North American Oil Consolidated, 9 Cir., 264 F. 336, affirming D.C. 1917, 242 F. 723, appeal dismissed 1922, 258 U.S. 633, 42 S.Ct. 315, 66 L.Ed. 802; Freshman v. Atkins, 269 U. S. 121, 46 S.Ct. 41, 70 L.Ed. 193; Booth v. Fletcher, 69 App.D.C. 351, 101 F.2d 676, certiorari denied 307 U.S. 628, 59 S.Ct. 835, 83 L.Ed. 1511; Suren v. Oceanic S. S. Co., 9 Cir., 85 F.2d 324, certiorari denied 300 U.S. 653, 57 S.Ct. 430, 81 L.Ed. 863.

Not only that, but it is settled law that the court may take judicial notice of other cases including the same subject matter or questions of a related nature between the same parties. United States v. North American Oil Consolidated, supra; Sunkist Drinks, Inc., v. Calif. Fruit Growers Exchange, D.C., 25 F.Supp. 400; Freshman v. Atkins, supra; Booth v. Fletcher, supra; *396 Kithcart v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 8 Cir., 88 F.2d 407; National Fire Ins. Co. of Hartford v. Thompson, 281 U.S. 331, 50 S.Ct. 288, 74 L.Ed. 881.

Nor is there anything in the contention that a motion for summary judgment must be accompanied by supporting affidavits. (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 56, U.S.C.A. Tit. 28, following Section 723c.) The Rule does not make such mandatory. Reynolds v. Needle, — U.S.App.D.C. —, 132 F.2d 161, decided Dec. 14, 1942.

There being no reversible error, it follows, therefore, that the judgment of the lower court must be affirmed.

United States v. Bernard L. Barker, A/K/A Frank or Fran Carter, United States of America v. Eugenio R. Martinez, A/K/A Gene or Jene Valdes, United States of America v. Frank A. Sturgis, A/K/A Frank Angelo Fiorini, A/K/A Edward J. Hamilton,a/k/a Joseph Dialberto or D'alberto, United States of America v. Virgilio R. Gonzalez, A/K/A Raul or Raoul Godoy or Goboy

514 F.2d 208 (D.C. Circuit, 1975)

United States v. Barker

514 F.2d 208 (D.C. Circuit, 1975)

Barrera v. ROSCOE, SNYDER AND PACIFIC RAILWAY CO.

385 F. Supp. 455 (N.D. Texas, 1973)

Lula A. McGlasson v. The United States

397 F.2d 303 (Court of Claims, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

133 F.2d 395, 77 U.S. App. D.C. 99, 1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 2512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fletcher-v-evening-star-newspaper-co-cadc-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack