From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Steiger v. Mullaney

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Nov 1, 1948
8 F.R.D. 486 (S.D.N.Y. 1948)

Opinion

         Action by Ruch C. Steiger against George P. J. Mullaney. On plaintiff's motion to transfer case to jury calendar.

         Motion denied.

         

          Bleakley, Platt, Gilchrist & Walker, of New York City, for plaintiff.

          Leo F. Potts, of New York City, for defendant.


          KNOX, Chief Judge.

         From the standpoint of personal inclination, I should be glad to relieve plaintiff from the consequences of the failure of her attorneys seasonably to damand that her cause of action be tried to a jury. Nevertheless, since defendant opposes the motion here made, I seriously doubt my right, except for reasons, far more persuasive than those here advanced, to exercise my discretion in favor of the plaintiff. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., have now been in force for a period of about ten years, and if a default thereunder is believed by an adversary to be of advantage to himself, I entertain the view that I cannot properly take it away from him. For this reason, the motion to transfer this case to the jury calendar is denied.

         See MacDonald et al. v. Central Vermont Ry., D.C., 31 F.Supp. 298; Irvine v. Luckenbach S. S. Co. Inc., D.C., 7 F.R.D. 127; Arnold v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., D.C., 7 F.R.D. 678; State of Delaware v. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co., D.C., 3 F.R.D. 165; McNabb v. Kansas City Life Ins. Co., 8 Cir., 139 F.2d 591.


Summaries of

Steiger v. Mullaney

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Nov 1, 1948
8 F.R.D. 486 (S.D.N.Y. 1948)
Case details for

Steiger v. Mullaney

Case Details

Full title:STEIGER v. MULLANEY.

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Nov 1, 1948

Citations

8 F.R.D. 486 (S.D.N.Y. 1948)

Citing Cases

Strom v. Anderson

My right to grant plaintiff's motion is seriously doubted. Steiger v. Mullaney, D.C., 8 F.R.D. 486. Defendant…

Ridge Theatre Corp. v. United Artists Corp.

Krussman v. Omaha Woodmen Life Ins. Soc., D.C.Idaho 1941, 2 F.R.D. 3. See also Arnold v. Chicago, B. & Q. R.…