Lantz v. New York Central Railroad

N.D. Ohio

Lantz v. New York Central Railroad

37 F.R.D. 69, 1963 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10397

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio

DecidedMarch 28, 1963

DocketCiv. A. No. 36766

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 37 F.R.D. 69 (Lantz v. New York Central Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lantz v. New York Central Railroad, 37 F.R.D. 69, 1963 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10397 (N.D. Ohio 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

KALBFLEISCH, District Judge.

Admissions sought under Rule 36 should not be of such great number and broad scope as to cover all the issues of a complex case. Reinauer Oil Transport (Dist.Mass., 1956), 19 F.R.D. 5; and Alaska Credit Bureau of Juneau v. Stevenson (D.C.Alaska, 1954), 15 F.R.D. 409; Moore’s Federal Practice, Section 36ff. Obviously, admissions should not be sought in an attempt to harass an opposing party. Likewise, there are times when, because of the sanctions imposed by Rule 37, requests for production of documents and the propounding of interrogatories are more appropriate methods of obtaining information. A request for a party’s admission of a legal conclusion or opinion hardly seems to be an appropriate procedure; however, Rule 36 does provide a procedure whereby the necessity of proving obviously true but complicated facts is eliminated.

The plaintiff will respond to the following requests for admissions: 1-18, inch, 22-26, inch, 28-31, inch, 33, 56-58, inch, 60, 62, 64-67, inch, 69 and 70.

Plaintiff’s objections to requests Nos. 19-21, inch, 27, 32, 34-55, inch, 59, 61, 63 and 68 will be sustained.

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

KALBFLEISCH, District Judge.

Admissions sought under Rule 36 should not be of such great number and broad scope as to cover all the issues of a complex case. Reinauer Oil Transport (Dist.Mass., 1956), 19 F.R.D. 5; and Alaska Credit Bureau of Juneau v. Stevenson (D.C.Alaska, 1954), 15 F.R.D. 409; Moore’s Federal Practice, Section 36ff. Obviously, admissions should not be sought in an attempt to harass an opposing party. Likewise, there are times when, because of the sanctions imposed by Rule 37, requests for production of documents and the propounding of interrogatories are more appropriate methods of obtaining information. A request for a party’s admission of a legal conclusion or opinion hardly seems to be an appropriate procedure; however, Rule 36 does provide a procedure whereby the necessity of proving obviously true but complicated facts is eliminated.

The plaintiff will respond to the following requests for admissions: 1-18, inch, 22-26, inch, 28-31, inch, 33, 56-58, inch, 60, 62, 64-67, inch, 69 and 70.

Plaintiff’s objections to requests Nos. 19-21, inch, 27, 32, 34-55, inch, 59, 61, 63 and 68 will be sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 F.R.D. 69, 1963 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10397, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lantz-v-new-york-central-railroad-ohnd-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack