Power Specialty Co. v. Connecticut Light & Power Co.

D. Connecticut

Power Specialty Co. v. Connecticut Light & Power Co.

39 F.2d 493, 1930 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1977

CourtDistrict Court, D. Connecticut

DecidedFebruary 11, 1930

DocketNo. 1869

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 39 F.2d 493 (Power Specialty Co. v. Connecticut Light & Power Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Power Specialty Co. v. Connecticut Light & Power Co., 39 F.2d 493, 1930 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1977 (D. Conn. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

THOMAS, District Judge.

The question presented upon the motion papers, supporting affidavits, arguments, and briefs is one of procedure involving the jurisdiction of this court.

After a careful examination of the papers on file, as well as a consideration of the authoritative decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States governing the question, I conclude that this court is without jurisdiction and that the defendants’ application for leave to file a bill of review, or a petition to reopen on the ground of newly discovered evidence, should be made to the Circuit Court of Appeals. National Brake & Electric Co. v. Christensen, 254 U. S. 425, 41 S. Ct. 154, 65 L. Ed. 341; John Simmons Co. v. Grier Brothers Co., 258 U. S. 82, 42 S. Ct. 196, 66 L. Ed. 475.

The plaintiff’s motion to discharge the order to show cause and dismiss the petition for leave to file a bill of review is granted.

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

THOMAS, District Judge.

The question presented upon the motion papers, supporting affidavits, arguments, and briefs is one of procedure involving the jurisdiction of this court.

After a careful examination of the papers on file, as well as a consideration of the authoritative decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States governing the question, I conclude that this court is without jurisdiction and that the defendants’ application for leave to file a bill of review, or a petition to reopen on the ground of newly discovered evidence, should be made to the Circuit Court of Appeals. National Brake & Electric Co. v. Christensen, 254 U. S. 425, 41 S. Ct. 154, 65 L. Ed. 341; John Simmons Co. v. Grier Brothers Co., 258 U. S. 82, 42 S. Ct. 196, 66 L. Ed. 475.

The plaintiff’s motion to discharge the order to show cause and dismiss the petition for leave to file a bill of review is granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 F.2d 493, 1930 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1977, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/power-specialty-co-v-connecticut-light-power-co-ctd-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack