Robert E. Hooper v. Chrysler Motors Corporation
325 F.2d 321
Opinion
Appellant’s case was dismissed with prejudice by the District Court when he declined to go to trial after denial of his motion for continuance. No abuse of discretion appears either with respect to the denial of the motion for continuance, or the dismissal. Rule 41(b), F.R. Civ.P.; Joseph v. Norton Co., 2 Cir., 1959, 273 F.2d 65; and Girard Trust Co. v. Amsterdam, 5 Cir., 1942, 128 F.2d 376.
It follows that the judgment appealed from must be, and is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Robert E. Hooper v. Chrysler Motors Corporation, 325 F.2d 321 (5th Cir. 1964).
325 F.2d 321 (Robert E. Hooper v. Chrysler Motors Corporation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Lewis v. Rawson
564 F.3d 569 (Second Circuit, 2009)
Richardson v. Lane
736 P.2d 63 (Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals, 1987)
Howard Welsh v. Automatic Poultry Feeder Company
439 F.2d 95 (Eighth Circuit, 1971)
Welsh v. Automatic Poultry Feeder Co.
439 F.2d 95 (Eighth Circuit, 1971)