Campbell v. Waterman S. S. Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that it lies “within the discretion of the court to allow such intervention, taking into consideration whether the intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties”
• “[t]he Court finds that the possibility that JSL may be subject to a future claim for indemnification does not satisfy Rule 24(a)'s requirements that an intervenor of right must demonstrate a legally protectable interest in the proceedings ....” (emphasis in original)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).