From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Theiss v. Owens-Illinois Glass Co.

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Feb 19, 1940
1 F.R.D. 175 (W.D. Pa. 1940)

Opinion

         At Law. Action by Dennis Theiss against the Owens-Illinois Glass Company. On motion of plaintiff to set aside the court order striking the plaintiff's motion for new trial.

         Motion denied.

          Clair D. Moss, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for plaintiff.

          John M. Reed, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for defendant.


          SCHOONMAKER, District Judge.

         On January 19, 1940, the court struck from the record in this case the plaintiff's motion for a new trial, because of non-compliance with Rule 59(b), Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, in that the plaintiff's motion for a new trial was not served within ten days after the entry of judgment.

         We are of the opinion that we cannot now enlarge the time of serving the motion for a new trial, for Rule 6(b) specifically states that the court ‘ may not enlarge the period for taking any action under Rule 59, except as stated in subdivision (c) thereof.’

         We therefore deny the motion to set aside the order of court striking the plaintiff's motion for a new trial.


Summaries of

Theiss v. Owens-Illinois Glass Co.

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Feb 19, 1940
1 F.R.D. 175 (W.D. Pa. 1940)
Case details for

Theiss v. Owens-Illinois Glass Co.

Case Details

Full title:THEISS v. OWENS-ILLINOIS GLASS CO.

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Feb 19, 1940

Citations

1 F.R.D. 175 (W.D. Pa. 1940)

Citing Cases

Smith v. Mosier

See Rule 60(b) as amended of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Clark v. Lansburgh Bro., Inc., D.C., 38 F.…

Albano v. Bonanza International Development Co.

Sadowski v. Bombardier Ltd., 527 F.2d 1132 (7th Cir. 1975). Theiss v. Owens-Ill. Glass Co., 1 F.R.D. 175…