In re Plaut

Second Circuit

In re Plaut

172 F. 1023, 96 C.C.A. 666, 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 4940

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided November 27, 1908·Published

Opinion

PER OIJRIAM.

It is unnecessary to go into any of the points of law which have been raised on this motion. We are not prepared to hold that it was an improper exercise of the discretion of the District Judge to require the plaintiff to terminate his prior state court action, either by (rial or discontinuance, before proceeding to the trial of the second and later one, which he has brought on precisely the same cause of action.

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

PER OIJRIAM.

It is unnecessary to go into any of the points of law which have been raised on this motion. We are not prepared to hold that it was an improper exercise of the discretion of the District Judge to require the plaintiff to terminate his prior state court action, either by (rial or discontinuance, before proceeding to the trial of the second and later one, which he has brought on precisely the same cause of action.

In re Plaut, 172 F. 1023, 96 C.C.A. 666, 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 4940 (2d Cir. 1908).

Pincite

172 F. 1023 (In re Plaut) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.