MacLeod & Co. v. United States

295 F. 432, 1924 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1822, 1924 A.M.C. 464
District Court, W.D. Washington·Decided January 28, 1924·No. No. 7810·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

NETERER, District Judge.

Interrogatories calling for evidence must be confined to testimony necessary to the proof of the libelant's case (Prince Line, Ltd., v. Mayer & Lage, Inc. [D. C.] 264 Fed. 856), and may not be used merely to fish into the evidence which the interrogated party may produce in support of its own allegations (The Princess Sophia [D. C.] 269 Fed. 651). See also The Hewitt (D. C.) 284 Fed. 911, American Maritime Cases (1923) 89.

The exceptions must be sustained, except to the supplemental interrogatory as to the longitude and latitude in which the storm occurred.

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

MacLeod & Co. v. United States, 295 F. 432, 1924 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1822, 1924 A.M.C. 464 (W.D. Wash. 1924).

295 F. 432 (MacLeod & Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Curtis v. United States
27 F. Supp. 459 (D. Massachusetts, 1939)
In re Navigazione Libera Triestina
34 F.2d 152 (E.D. New York, 1929)
The Favorita
35 F.2d 352 (S.D. New York, 1929)
Malgor v. Royal Insurance
13 P.R. Fed. 398 (D. Puerto Rico, 1924)