Morris v. Wm. J. Duggan Co.

3 F.R.D. 39, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1797
CourtDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts
DecidedNovember 3, 1942
DocketCiv. A. No. 1979
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 3 F.R.D. 39 (Morris v. Wm. J. Duggan Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Massachusetts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Morris v. Wm. J. Duggan Co., 3 F.R.D. 39, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1797 (D. Mass. 1942).

Opinion

FORD, District Judge.

It appearing that Cornelius D. Duggan has already answered interrogatories proposed to him by the plaintiff, the motion, insofar as it relates to this subject, is denied. I see no reason for compelling any further answers.

In the plaintiff’s motion to admit facts and documents, he designates no time within which the admissions should be ■made as required by Rule 36, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. If he amends his request in this regard and designates the time within which the admissions are requested, the defendant — if, of course, he cares to do so — will either deny, under oath, specifically the matters of which the admissions are requested or set forth in detail the reasons why he cannot truthfully admit or deny those matters. Rule 36, F.R.C.P.

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

Related

Apodaca v. Gordon
521 P.2d 1159 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 F.R.D. 39, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1797, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morris-v-wm-j-duggan-co-mad-1942.