1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 330 F.Supp.
  5. 330 F.Supp. 614 (1971)
 

ACROMAG, INCORPORATED v. TRANSMATION, INCORPORATED

No. C70-1199.

330 F.Supp. 614 (1971)

ACROMAG, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff, v. TRANSMATION, INCORPORATED, Defendant.

United States District Court, N. D. Ohio, E. D.

June 29, 1971.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

J. Herman Yount, Jr., Yount & Tarolli, Cleveland, Ohio, for plaintiff.

Gary L. Bryenton, Baker, Hostetler & Patterson, Cleveland, Ohio, for defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

BATTISTI, Chief Judge.

The defendant has submitted a motion, purportedly under F.R.Civ.P. Rule 59(e), for the Court "to alter or amend the judgment heretofore [sic] entered in this action * * *." Since, however, that Memorandum Opinion and Order was interlocutory and thus not subject to the restrictions of Rule 59, the Court will consider the defendant's motion rather as one merely for reconsideration.

In its previous...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases