TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

William Goldman Theatres, Inc. v. Loew's, Inc.

William Goldman Theatres, Inc. v. Loew's, Inc., 83 F. Supp. 455 (E.D. Pa. 1949)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Federal District Courts
Decided
January 21, 1949
Docket
No. Civ. No. 2877
Judges
Kirkpatrick
Citations
83 F. Supp. 4551949 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2881

Opinion of the Court — Kirkpatrick

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

KIRKPATRICK, Chief Judge.

Final judgment in this case was entered by this Court on December 19, 1946, D.C., 69 F.Supp. 103 . Thereafter there was an appeal, an affirmance by the Circuit Court of Appeals and, 3 Cir., 164 F.2d 1021 , on May 3, 1948, denial by the Supreme Court of a petition for certiorari. 334 U.S. 811 , 69 S.Ct. 1016 .

On June 23, 1948, the plaintiff filed with this Court a motion to reform the final decree by providing either that the defendants divest themselves of theatre ownership in this district or that cross-licensing among the defendants be prohibited. Pending at that time were motions by some of the defendants for an interpretation of the decree. The plaintiff’s and the defendants’ motions were argued together, and at the argument, on November 1, the Court denied the plaintiff’s motion, disposing of the defendants’ motions later on in a memorandum opinion filed on November 30.

On January 5, 1949, the plaintiff moved the Court “to reconsider, and, after reconsideration, to grant the plaintiff’s Motion to reform the Court’s Final Decree entered December 19, 1946.” The defendants then filed this motion to strike and dismiss the plaintiff’s motion to reconsider.

Rule 59(a), (b) and (e), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., precludes the Court from entertaining this motion to- reconsider-, which was made 55 days after the expiration of the 10 day limit set by Rule 59 for such motions, as interpreted in Safeway Stores v. Coe, 78 U.S.App.D.C. 19 , 136 F.2d 771 , 148 A.L.R. 782 . The Court has no power to extend the time. Rule 6(b) authorizes extensions of time by the Court in some matters, “but it may not extend the time for taking any action under Rules * * *59(b), (d) and (e) * *

The motion to strike is granted.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1955: 11956: 11980: 119552026peak 1955 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Larsen v. International Business Machines Corp.87 F.R.D. 602 (E.D. Pa. 1980)
  2. Burton R. Raughley v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company230 F.2d 387 (3d Cir. 1956)
  3. William Kelly v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company228 F.2d 727 (3d Cir. 1955)

Most recent

  1. Larsen v. International Business Machines Corp.87 F.R.D. 602 (E.D. Pa. 1980)
  2. Burton R. Raughley v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company230 F.2d 387 (3d Cir. 1956)
  3. William Kelly v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company228 F.2d 727 (3d Cir. 1955)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Coe, 136 F.2d 771 (D.C. Cir. 1943) 64
William Goldman Theatres, Inc. v. Loew's, Inc., 164 F.2d 1021 (3d Cir. 1948) 48
William Goldman Theatres, Inc. v. Loew's, Inc., 69 F. Supp. 103 (E.D. Pa. 1946) 44

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list