Hamburg-Amerika Linie v. Gulf-Puerto Rico Lines, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the court was entitled to take judicial notice that the distance between two cities exceeded the Rule’s 100-mile threshold
• affirming trial court's grant of defendant's motion for summary judgment 9 days after it was served on plaintiff where plaintiff neither called court's attention to the fact that Rule 56(c
• affirming trial court’s grant of defendant’s motion for summary judgment 9 days after it was served on plaintiff where plaintiff neither called court’s attention to the fact that Rule 56(c
• not reversible error where court entered summary judgment against appellant prior to expiration of ten day period where appellant made no claim “of any specific resulting prejudice”
• two cases arising out of the same accident were “prime subjects for consolidation under the policy that considerations of judicial economy strongly favor simultaneous resolution of all claims growing out of one event”
• district court did not err in allowing witness’ deposition to be read to the jury where the opposing party had said that it would ascertain whether witness was more than 100 miles from the courthouse but did not do so

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).