Seattle Title Trust Co. v. United States

49 F.2d 818, 1931 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1355
District Court, W.D. Washington·Decided May 8, 1931·No. Nos. 20122, 20104, 20119, 20146·Published

Opinion

BOÜRQUIN, District-Judge.

In these actions to recover upon war risk insurance policies, plaintiffs present motions . for inspection of Veterans’ Bureau records in advance of and to prepare for trial. The motions are granted.

For although in 1929 the writer denied a like motion in Dennis’ Case in reliance upon what seemed to be the greater weight of authority, and also Carpenter v. Winn, 221 U. S. 533, 31 S. Ct. 683, 55 L. Ed. 842, subsequently in Massey’s Case (D. C.) 46 F.(2d) 78, Neterer, J., held otherwise. And not only to avoid innovations in matters of practise by a visiting judge, but also persuaded that Judge Neterer’s decision clearly distinguishes the statutes involved, is logical in reasoning, sound in principle, and lays down the better and just rule, this order conforms thereto.

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

Seattle Title Trust Co. v. United States, 49 F.2d 818, 1931 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1355 (W.D. Wash. 1931).

49 F.2d 818 (Seattle Title Trust Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Carpenter v. Winn
221 U.S. 533 (Supreme Court, 1911)
Massey v. United States
46 F.2d 78 (W.D. Washington, 1930)