Schlage Lock Co. v. Pratt-Rymer Co.
This text of 46 F.2d 703 (Schlage Lock Co. v. Pratt-Rymer Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Defendants have interposed objections to complainant’s interrogatories on the ground that the bill of complaint seeks treble damages under the statutory provision, invoking the rule of practice promulgated by this court in the ease of Paraffine Cos., Inc., v. Wieland, 17 F.(2d) 992, 996, whore Judge Kerrigan held, with my approval, “that a party will not be required to answer interrogatories which might result in a penalty through imposition of treble damages.”
In making this rule, we accepted the reasoning in Wilson v. Union Tool Co. (D. C.) 275 F. 624. But upon further consideration Judge Kerrigan and I are of the opinion that tho better view on this question is expressed in Perkins Oil Well Cementing Co. v. Owen (D. C.) 293 F. 759, which favors a liberal interpretation of Equity Rule 58 (28 ÜS0A § 723) and sections 4919 and 4921, Revised Statutes (35 USCA §§ 67, 70), and is supported by the weight of authority.
In accordance with such interpretation, it is ordered that the objections to interrogatories Nos. 1 to 8, inclusive, be, and the same are hereby, overruled, and that the objections to interrogatories Nos. 9 and 10 be, and they are hereby, sustained.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
46 F.2d 703, 1931 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1135, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schlage-lock-co-v-pratt-rymer-co-cand-1931.