Bishop v. Boston & M. R. R.
Citations
- 117 F. 771
- 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 5136
Syllabus
<p>1. Federad Courts—Jurisdiction—Action by Administrator—Diverse Citizenship.</p> <p>For the purpose of determining the jurisdiction of a federal court on the ground of diverse citizenship, in an action by an administrator for the wrongful killing of his intestate, the citizenship of the administrator, and not of the beneficiaries of the action, controls, and a complaint failing to allege the citizenship of the administrator is insufficient.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that a Magistrate Judge’s resolution of a “request to compel production” is evaluated under a clearly erroneous or contrary to law standard
- denying a document request because it was overbroad and not limited 1 The Debtor Defendants are Bloomberry Resorts and Hotels, Inc. (“BRHI”) and Sureste Properties, Inc. (“SPI”
- “‘[B]oilerplate objections that include unsubstantiated claims of undue burden, overbreadth and lack of relevancy,’ while producing ‘no documents and answer[ing] no interrogatories…are a paradigm of discovery abuse.’”
- “Boilerplate objections that include unsubstantiated claims of undue burden, overbreadth and lack of relevancy, while producing no documents and answering no interrogatories are a paradigm of discovery abuse.”
- sustaining vagueness objection conduct of plaintiff”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Dowell
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.